Guest guest Posted October 12, 2003 Report Share Posted October 12, 2003 My humble obeisances to you and Bhakti Vikas Swamiji! I am not qualified to make any comment on this spiritual matter, but it's only due to the intelligence given by Krishna that I am trying to address your points Rajaram : 1. 14.27 should continue what was spoken in 14.26 or else there is a defectof incoherance, which is not possible in the words of the lord. therefore,14.27 should describe the lord or the brahman platform that was talked aboutin the previous verse. Answer: 14.27 is surely talking about the Brahman platform. Krishna is saying "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" - Brahman is resting on Me. which is what even the Ishopanishad says: "Hiranmayena Patrena Satyasya Apahita Mukham" - The pure devotee asking the Lord to remove the glaring effulgence which is covering the transcendental face of the Lord! ---------- Rajaram: 14.26 talks about a pure devotee attaining brahman.as per gaudiyas, a pure devotee does not desire sayujya mukti. therefore howcan 14.27 talk about brahma jyoti ? Answer: Brahman stage is the first stage in the spiritual realization. The Brahman stage means practically applying the "Aham Brahmaasmi" principle, which means to practically know that "I am the Spirit Soul" and not the body made of the five material elements, nor the mind nor the intellegence and nor the false ego! But there is a stage beyond this "Aham Brahmaasmi" stage and that is told by Krishna Himself: "Brahma Bhuta Prasannaatmaa, Na Shochati Na Kankshati, Samah Sarveshu Bhuteshu, Mad Bhakti Labhate Param" These transcendental words from Sri Krishna clearly says that the Supreme Transcendental devotional service platform towards Krishna is a stage which is attained after the "Aham Brahmaasmi" or the Brahma bhuta stage! In that context 14.27 is very clear where Krishna is again stating the same - Saying that Brahman is subordinate to Him - "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham"! Rajaram: 2. also, how can gaudiyas assign qualities such as ultimate happiness tobrahman having said that it is devoid of ananda ? one may say that is sukhaand not ananda that is referred to in the verse and so it is not a defect. Answer: What is said is that Brahman realisation is the realisation of the "Sat" - Truth feature of the Lord Sri Krishna. Paramaatmaa realisation is the "Chit" - Knowledge feature of the Lord and Bhagavaan realisation is the realisation of the "Ananda" - Bliss feature of the Lord. As stated in Srimad Bhaagavatam: "Vadanti Tat Tattva Vidas, Tattvam Yad Jnyanam Advayam, Brahmeti Paramaatmeti, Bhagavaan Iti Shabdyate" -- Rajaram: but then the pure devotees would not benefit from attaining such a platform. Answer: Your statement can be answered by the fact that once a pure devotee realis es the Bhagavaan aspect of Sri Krishna all the other aspects are already realised, because of other aspects being subordinate to Bhagavaan Sri Krishna! -- Rajaram: 3. the gaudiyas may defend saying that the verse 14.27 clarifies thedifference between brahman platform (goloka) referred to in 14.26 and thebrahma jyoti. but having not talked about brahma jyoti anywhere before inthe gita, there is no need for clarifying. Answer: Please have a look at Srila Prabhupada's purport for 14.26 - http://www.asitis.com/14/26.html and 14.27 - http://www.asitis.com/14/27.html He is clearly referring to Brahman stated by Sri Krishna to be the "Aham Brahmaasmi" - I am the Pure Spirit Soul position and not to to Goloka. And he clearly states in His purports that the oneness which the living entity perceives at the Brahman realisation stage is the oneness in terms of quality and not quantity. Otherwise Arjuna would not have addressed Sri Krishna as: "Param Brahma Param Dhaama, Pavitram Paramam Bhavaan, Purusham Shaashvatam Divyam, Aadi Devam Ajam Vibhum" ------- Rajaram: 4. also how can we defend the statement by hh sivarama swami maharaja thatbrahman is "disposable", when the lord says that brahman is eternal. Answer: I am not sure whather HH Sivarama Swami told this. Even if He has told this, it can be justified by the fact of Sri Krishna's assertion that "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham - Brahman is subordinate to Me". And since Brahman is subordinate to Sri Krishna, once the pure devotee starts enjoying the transcendental mellows (rasa) with the Lord because Krishna is "Raso Vai Sah" - full of Rasa, He does'nt want to listen about anything else then Sri Krishna's pastimes. At that time the mention of Brahman is not very palatable to the pure devotee of the Lord. And from this point of view you can understand the meaning of Sivarama Swami's statement. Surely no transcendentalist will argue the fact that Brahman is eternal, when it is said by Sri Krishna Himself! ---------- Rajaram: 5. the different vaishnava acharyas have different interpretation of what isreferred to by brahman in verse 14.27 and therefore why is there is acontention with sankara's alone ? Answer: Shankaraachaarya is considered to be an incarnation of Lord Shiva and He had descended to achieve a specific objective and that was to make the people of that era understand the significance of Vedas and Shruti. That time people were becoming very much influenced by the "Nihilistic" Budhdhist philosophy, which rejected even the presence of Brahman. So Shankaraachaarya kindly lead those people in darkness to the light of Vedic literature by not clearly stating about the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but mentioning it in coded terms as Srila Vyasadeva mentioned about Sri Krishna in coded terms in "Brahma Sutra". --------------- Rajaram: each acharya purports based on his realization. Answer: This is true. And the greatness of this is that though each Achaaryas give their purports based on their realization, and sometimes it may even seem to be contradictory but finally everyone is referring to this simple statement that "Krishnas Tu Bhagavaan Swayam" that Krishna is "The Supreme Personality of Godhead" Hope my attempt to give answers helps you and also hope that you'll forgive me if you feel that I've said something wrong here. As said earlier, I am very much unqualified to do this, but only because of the intelligence given by Krishna I'm able to do it. --------- Hare Krishna! Dasanudasa, Somesh The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2003 Report Share Posted October 14, 2003 All Glories to Srila Prahupada!!H.H.Bhakti Vikasa Swami <Bhakti.Vikasa.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote: The following text from R. Venkataramani makes some interesting points thatAchintya-ites may like to address. >1. 14.27 should continue what was spoken in 14.26 or else there is a defect>of incoherance, which is not possible in the words of the lord. therefore,>14.27 should describe the lord or the brahman platform that was talked about>in the previous verse. 14.26 talks about a pure devotee attaining brahman.>as per gaudiyas, a pure devotee does not desire sayujya mukti. therefore how>can 14.27 talk about brahma jyoti ? Hare Krishna. Pleae accept my humble obeisances. This point is addressed by Srila Jiva Goswami in the Bhagavat Sandabha as follows: Quote: The Supreme Personality of Godhead is superior to the impersonal Brahman. Lord Siva confirms this in his instructions to the Pracetas (Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.24.28): "Any person who is surrendered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, who is above the Brahman effulgence, the material nature, and the living entity, is actually very dear to me." In this verse the word "rahah" means “Brahman". Greater than Brahman (rahah), the unmanifest stage of the three modes of material nature (tri-gunat), and the individual living entities (jiva-samjnitat), is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One surrenders to Him by hearing about Him, offering the fruits of one's work to Him, and serving Him in other ways. This is also confirmed in the Visnu-dharma Purana, Naraka-dvadaci-vrata, Sri Visnu-stava: "Lord Vasudeva, the all-pervading Supersoul, is present in the sky and other material elements, in sound and other objects of sense-perception, in the ears and the other senses, in the mahat-tattva and other primordial forces, in the material energy, in the individual person, and in the impersonal Brahman splendor. This truth brings to destruction the sins that would make me suffer in hell. This truth gives me every day the glory of transcendental piety." In this context a different interpretation of the word “sarvatma" cannot be accepted. This is also confirmed by the following statement of Visnu-dharma Purana, Uttara-khanda, Ksetrabandhupakhyaya: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is present in the impersonal Brahman. He is present in the unmanifested pradhana. He is present in the manifested material cosmos. I shall become His devotee." That the Supreme Personality of Godhead is superior to the impersonal Brahman is also confirmed in the following statement of Visnu-dharma Purana, Masarksa-puja: "O infallible Lord, O Supreme Soul greater than the impersonal Brahman, please grant my desire! O limitless Lord, please remove this danger!!" In the Sri Visnu Purana (1.5.55) also it is said: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is superior to the impersonal Brahman." The Sruti-sastra (Mundaka Upanisad 2.1.2) says: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is superior to the impersonal Brahman." This is also confirmed in the Sruti-sastra (Taittiriya Upanisad 2.1.3-2.5.1) in the passage beginning with "He, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is realized in His form of anna-rasa", and continuing through the statements "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the basis of everyting. . . .He is the basis of the earth. . . . He is the basis of the Vedas. . . . He is the basis of light. . . .. He is the basis of the impersonal Brahman". This is also confirmed in the fifth Veda, the Smrti-castra, where, in the Bhagavad-gita (14.27), Lord Krsna says: "I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman"*. In this way the statement "I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman" is spoken in both Sruti and Smrti, and in Bhagavad-gita it is emphasized by the word "hi" (certainly). Immediately preceding these words is the following statement (Bhagavad-gita 14.26): "One who engages in full devotional service, unfailing in all circumstances, at once transcends the modes of material nature and thus comes to the level of Brahman."* This is the verse immediately preceding the statement “I am the basis of Brahman". In this verse, by saying that Brahman is "beyond the modes of material nature" it is clear that the Brahman here is the impersonal Brahman potency and not the demigod Brahma. At this point someone may ask the Lord: "Why is devotional service to You (Bhagavad-gita 14.26) the means of attaining impersonal Brahman? One would expect that impersonal Brahman is attained only by meditation on Brahman (and not by devotion to You)." The Lord answers this question with the words: "I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman". In the Sruti-sastra (Taittiriya Upanisad 2.2.5) the answer is also given: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the basis of the impersonal Brahman". In this way the Sruti-sastra affirms that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the ultimate basis of everything. Also, in that same passage of Taittiriya Upanisad, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is described as full of bliss. This is also confirmed by the author of Vedanta-sutra (1.1.12): “The Supreme Personality of Godhead is by nature full of joy". As the sun-globe is full of light, so the blissful Supreme Personality of Godhead is also (full of the light of Brahman). For this reason the Lord says: "I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman". The Lord may say: "Although there is no difference between the impersonal Brahman and Me, nevertheless I am the origin of the Brahman. I am the ultimate. This is so because I am the origin and impersonal Brahman is My potency. The origin is naturally superior to its potency. This is so also because the Sruti-sastra affirms that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is superior to the impersonal Brahman. Although I, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and the impersonal Brahman, are one, We are also different as the splendid sun is different from the slender crescent moon. Therefore, because the impersonal Brahman is subordinate to Me, a person who, with the desire for impersonal liberation, worships Me, will attain the impersonal Brahman." That the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the origin of the impersonal Brahman is also explained in Sri Visnu Purana (6.7.75): "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the basis of the all-pervading Supersoul and the impersonal Brahman." Srila Sridhara Svami comments: "This verse means that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the basis of the all-pervading Supersoul and the impersonal Brahman. The word `acraya' here means `basis'. This is also confirmed in Bhagavad-gita (14.27), where Lord Krsna says, `I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman'." In his commentary on this verse in Bhagavad-gita, Srila Sridhara Svami says: "The Lord here says, `I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman'. This means that the Lord says, `As the sun-globe is a more important than mere light, so I am the more important than the impersonal Brahman'." The word ghani-bhuta here is a use of the grammatical form svi-pratyaya. The Supreme Personality of Godhead appears in the hearts of the devotees, but the impersonal Brahman does not appear there. The interpretation that the word “pratistha" in this verse (Bhagavad-gita 14.27) means “pratima" (reflected) is the idea of envious men. This interpretation is not true, for it makes no sense in this context. As the sun-planet is not a reflection of the sunshine, so the form of Supreme Personality of Godhead is not a reflection of the formless Brahman. The remaining three lines of this stanza (Bhagavad-gita 14.27) do not describe the liberation of the impersonalists. Neither do the verses we have quoted from Visnu Purana and Sruti-sastras describe it. The interpretation that "pratistha" means "pratima" should not be accepted, or if it is accepted, then "pratima" should be interpreted to mean "basis" and not "reflection". If this second interpretation is accepted, then the word “pratima" is understood to be derived from the preposition "prati" (toward) and the verb "ma" (to create). This is all also explained in the following prayer (Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.87.17) spoken by the Personified Vedas to the Supreme Personality of Godhead: "My dear Lord, it is imperative that the living entities be engaged in Krsna consciousness, always rendering devotional service by prescribed methods such as hearing and chanting and executing Your orders. If a person is not engaged in Krsna consciousness and devotional service, it is useless of him to exhibit the symptoms of life. Generally it is accepted that if a person is breathing he is alive. But a person without Krsna consciousness may be compared to a bellows in a blacksmith's shop. The big bellows is a bag of skin which exhales and inhales air, and a human being who is simply living within the bag of skin and bones without taking to Krsna consciousness and loving devotional service is no better than the bellows. Similary a nondevotee's long duration of life is compared to the long existence of a tree, his voracious eating capacity is compared to the eating of dogs and hogs, and his enjoyment in sex life is compared to that of hogs and goats. "The cosmic manifestation has been possible because of the entrance of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as Maha-Visnu within this material world. The total material energy becomes agitated by the galnce of Maha-Visnu and only then does the interaction of the three material qualities begin. Therefore it should be concluded that whatever material facilities we are trying to enjoy are avilable only due to the mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. "Within the body are five different departments of existence, known as annamaya, pranamaya, manomaya, vijnanamaya, and anandamaya. O Lord, You are present in all these five stages."* In this verse the word "anubhrtah" means “individual living entities (jivas), whose breathing is like the breathing of a blacksmith's bellows". The verse says: “If (yadi) the people become Your devotees (anuvidhah), then their breathing and living is meaningful. We consider that the life passed by Your devotees is the actually meaningful life among the lives of the living entities. Why? You mercifully created the material universe with its many parts, such as mahat-tattva and false ego. Therefore they who are averse to You, turning their faces from You, are no better than `breathing' blacksmith's bellows. You further showed You mercy when You personally entered the material universe made of mahat-tattva, false ego, and its other parts." The Lord here may ask: "Why is it that these things become possible only when I enter the universe?" The personified Vedas then reply: "You are the Supreme Brahman, eternal, dear, and known as anandamaya. You are above the stage of annamaya. You are the Brahman, the basis of everything." This is confirmed in all Vedic literatures. In the Bhagavad-gita the Lord Hiumself said: "I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman" (14.27). In many other places in Vedic literature this is proven. This is proven in Srimad-Bhagavatam (2.9.4): "O King, the Personality of Godhead, being very much pleased with Lord Brahma because of his nondeceptive penance in bhakti-yoga, presented His eternal and transcendental form before Brahma. And that is the objective goal for purifying the conditioned soul."* This verse proves, O Lord, that the real nature of the Supreme is You, the form of the Personality of Godhead. Of the purusas beginning with the annamaya-purusa, You are the ultimate, the anandamaya-purusa. Of the priya-brahma, moda-brahma, pramoda-brahma, and ananda-brahma, You are the supremely blissful ananda-brahma. Because Your form is the origin of all transcendental bliss, Your entrance into the material world makes it possible for the world to function. This is also confirmed by the Sruti-sastra (Taittiriya Upanisad 2.7): "If the blissful Personality of Godhead is not present in the sky of the heart, who is able to breathe and remain alive?" In this matter the following may be said. Although in the single form of the Supreme many variegated qualities are present, nevertheless, they are only seen with special vision given by the power of the Lord. They cannot be seen in any other way. An example may be given of the sun-planet. For material eyes the sun-planet is merely a circle of light, although the truth is that within the sun is an assembly of great demigods. From this example may be seen that only by devotional service is the whole truth about the nature of the Supreme understood. By adherence to the philosophy of impersonalism only a portion of the Supreme is understood. That partial manifestation of the Supreme is the impersonal Brahman. By impersonal philosophy only a very general understanding of the Supreme Truth is attained, an undertanding unable to see the many diverse qualities present in the Lord. For this reason the impersonal philosophy is situated outside the real truth. The great devotees directly see that the Supreme is filled with a great variety of wonderful transcendental qualities, although the impersonalists mistakenly think He is only a ball of light. In this way it is said that the Supreme has His lesser manifestations, His partial manifestations, and His potencies. The complete understanding of the Supreme is that the Supreme is the Personality of Godhead. His bodily effulgence, which is a vague and generalized manifestation of His form, is the Brahman. Therefore He is the basis of the impersonal Brahman. This is also confirmed by Sruti-sastra: "There is only one Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is Lord Narayana. He is transcendental, self-manifest, and sinless. The earth is His body. The soul is His body. The unimanifest pradhana is His body. The imperishable Brahman is His body. He is the Supersoul present in all creatures." This statement teaches that the imperishable (aksara), which here means Brahman, and the Supersoul, are Lord Narayana. That the word "aksara" here means “Brahman" is confirmed by the usage of that word in Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.15.43. The Supreme Personality of Godhead describes the sankhya philosophy in these words (Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.24.27): "Time merges into the Supreme Lord, present in the form of the omniscient Maha-purusa, the original activator of all living beings. That origin of all life merges into Me, the unborn Supreme Soul, who remains alone, established within Himself. It is from Him that all creation and annihilation are manifested. Only the impersonal Brahman remains and does not merge into Me."*** This means that at the time of cosmic annihilation only Brahman remains and the Supreme Personality of Godhead also remains as the witness of Brahman. The Lord then says (Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.24.29): "Thus I, the perfect seer of everything material and spiritual, have spoken this knowledge of Sankhya, which destroys the illusion of doubt by scientific analysis of creation and annihilation."*** A discussion of Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.24.29 follows. The word "sankhya" in this verse means “the philosophy expounded in the sankhya scriptures". Considering the specific feature of the form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as described in those scriptures, it is seen that the Lord's form remains unchanged at the time of cosmic annihilation. The impersonal Brahman also remains unchanged, as the form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the world of Vaikuntha both also remain unchanged at the final stage of cosmic annihilation. That is what is meant to be said here. At that time the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who stays in Vaikuntha and has transcendental potencies, is seen to be different from the impersonal Brahman. However, on the other hand, the impersonal Brahman, which because it has no qualities has neither touch, form, nor any other attribute, is also non-different from the Supreme Personality of Godhead because it is His bodily effulgence. This is the explanation. In this way it is proved that the impersonal Brahman is the bodily effulgence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is filled with the sweetness of His form, touch, and other transcendental attributes. This is also described in the Sri Hari-vamca, Maha-kala-pura, where the Supreme Personality of Godhead personally says to Sriman Arjuna: "O best of the Bhaaratas, I am the great divine Brahman effulgence you have just seen. It is My eternal splendor. "It is My divine potency. It is eternal. To some it is manifest, and to others it is not manifest. The great yogis enter it and become liberated. "O son of Prtha, it is the goal of the sankhya philosophers, the yogis, and the ascetics. It is the great Brahman that pervades the entire world. O Bharata, you should know that it is My great effulgence." These verses explain that because the Brahman effulgence is the light of the Lord's body, therefore it is His own transcendental potency. Unquote H.G. Bhurijana Prabhu writes in his "Surrender unto Me" as follows: Bhakthi is for both the sadhaka and the siddha.Kamis and Jnanis must eventualy give up their processes as they attain higher stages of consciousness, but one need never give up bhakti. Even karmis and Jnanis, who do not desire the shelter of Krishna's service as their ultimate goal, must take to devotional service in order to achieve the fruit of their processes...One may ask after reading 14.26 why one in full devotional service will attain Brahman. After all His desire is not Brahman realisation but Krishna's service. Krishna therefore expands His answer for clarification and ends the chapter by describing His own relationship with Brahman. Srila Visvanatha Chakaravati Thakura explains Krisna's words: "Because everything is dependent on Me, if one worships Me with the desire for impersonal merging, he will merge into Braman and attain the nature of Brahman." Arjuna, too, has confirmed Krishna as the Param Brahma, the supreme truth, the personality of Godhead in BG.10.13. Brahman is the basic transcendental platform upon which pure devotional service takes place.In Bg.13.13, Krishna said," Brahma, the spirit, beginningless and subordinate to Me, lies beyond the cause and effect of this material world".This Brahman, which is the goal of the impersonalists, is subordinate to Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and it rests upon His existence. >2. also, how can gaudiyas assign qualities such as ultimate happiness to>brahman having said that it is devoid of ananda ? one may say that is sukha>and not ananda that is referred to in the verse and so it is not a defect.>but then the pure devotees would not benefit from attaining such a platform. The last 3 lines of 14.27 does not tak about Brahman realisation or the realisation of the impersonalists but about Brahman in reality.Actually Brahman has the qualities as mentioned by Srila Prabhupada, but the impersonalist cannot perceive it. For them Brahman is qualityless and all pervading.In reality Brahman does have qualities as supported by many quotes from Sruti and Smrti. Some were given above.The impersonalist does not want to percieve any quality and the Lord does not let him percieve any.>3. the gaudiyas may defend saying that the verse 14.27 clarifies the>difference between brahman platform (goloka) referred to in 14.26 and the>brahma jyoti. but having not talked about brahma jyoti anywhere before in>the gita, there is no need for clarifying. Already in 13.13, Krisna said about Brahma and Arjuna had also called Krishna as ParamBrahma. The meaning is, : For a non-devotee: If you want to surpass the modes,which is when you attain the Brahman, even then, you have to render unbroken devotional sevice to Me,because, Brahman is subordinate to Me.A Parallel meaning for a devotee is: By engaging in pure devotional service, you will attain my transcendental nature. A devotee is not interested in anything other than Pure Krishna Consciousness. The essence of Gita is to Surrender to Krishna and render loving devotional sevice to Him. This is true both for the neophyte or the advanced devotee. Hence Srila Prabhupada has mercifully presented this in every verse of the Bhagavad Gita.Instead of talking of Brahma realisation, which is of no interest to Krishna conscious devotees, he presents only devotion. Srila Jiva Goswami establishes by analysis that,in the Bhagavad Gita, both in the beginning & at the end,the only instruction is to surrender to Krishna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead and hence, that is the message contained through out the in-between verses.>4. also how can we defend the statement by H.H.Sivarama Swami maharaja that>brahman is "disposable", when the lord says that brahman is eternal. A devotee is not interested in the Brahman realisation.Srila Rupa Goswami says in the BRS that the joy of liberation into Brahman multiplied a million times does not equal a drop of the bliss from pure devotional evice. Hence Brahman is disposable.Arjuna shuts his eyes up when he sees the Brahman.Same is the case with the devotee in Isopanishad. He's not interested in the Brahman.Saying "Disposable" does not in any way reduce Brahman's eternal nature. It is just that a devotee givs it up or throws it away or least interested in it, when exposed to pure devotional service to the Lord. Srila Prabhupada writes in 14.1 Purport:"If one understands this chapter through the process of philosophical speculation, he will come to an understanding of devotional service." >5. the different vaishnava acharyas have different interpretation of what is>referred to by brahman in verse 14.27 and therefore why is there is a>contention with sankara's alone ? each acharya purports based on his>realization. Its true that every acharya purports from His realisation. The problem is when the followers do not understand this & take their acharya's purports to be the ultimate. Question: Is that not the case with the Gaudiya Vaishnavas too, don't the take their achaya's purports as the ultimate: In Reply I'm quoting Srila Prabhupada's purports to BG.7.8 : "Practically speaking, there is no conflict between personaism and impersonalism. One who knows God knows that the impersonal conception and personal conception are simultaneously present in everything and that there is no contradiction.Therefore Lord Chatianya established His sublime doctrine :achintya bheda and abheda tattva- simultaneous oneness and difference." Further in his Purport to SB.1.2.11. he writes as follows: "Less intelligent students of either of the above schools sometimes argue in favor of their respective realization, but those who are perfect seers of the Absolute Truth know well that the above three features of the one Absolute Truth are different perspective views seen from different angle of Vision." This, I think looks neutral enough. Dasan Narasimhan. The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2003 Report Share Posted October 16, 2003 dear maharaj - hare krishna. please accept my humble obeisances. all glories to sri guru and sri govinda. one somesh pr. had responded from achintya group but my response to his mail did not go through as i am not a member thereof. i am forwarding it to you as it was you who initiated the discussion. praying for your unconditional mercy for my progress in devotion, your humble servant rajaram v. hare krishna somesh prabhu. please accept my humble obeisances. all glories to sri guru and sri govinda. hh bhakti vikas maharaj is a great devotee and an accomplished sannyasi. it is improper etiquette on your part to offer obeisances to him and an ordinary lay person like me in the same breadth as in your mail. request you to correct the same going forward. btw, i appreciate that you have not attempted to fight sankara's commentary but only tried to defend gaudiya commentary. as you said, philosophy should lead us to devotion towards the supreme lord sri govinda. and who can question the efficacy of the teachings of vaishnava acharyas in that ? it is due to their unconditional love and untiring service that the seed of devotion is sown in different barren lands (conditioned jivas). in this context, i really dont think it is important for me to debate your defense. however, let me quickly touch upon the same out of interest in philosophy and to prevent gross abuse of sankara such as calling him a rascal or his philosophy as wrong. 1. you have resolved the issue of incoherance by saying brahman means brahma jyoti in both brahma bhuyaya kalpate (14.26) and brahmano hi(14.27). but this opens up a pandora's box of philosophical issues in gaudiya philosphy that are not to be seen with sankara's interpretation that brahman means the lord. The following are ths issues : a. gaudiya devotees dont want to attain the brahma jyoti (14.26) but they still get it. b. the lord says that brahman is eternal (14.27) but for gaudiyas it is a temporary state to be replaced by active transcendental devotional service. also brahman platform has the risk of falling down. c. the lord says brahman is ultimate in happiness but gaudiyas dont accept it. for them there is no ananda in aham brahmasmi realization and that is why brahman realized souls may fall down and take up material activities. on the other hand, if you take brahman to mean the lord as sankara does, then there is no such contradiction. it is appropriate to call him ultimate in happiness and eternal. 2. you had quoted hiranmayena and vadanti tat verses. i would like to point out that they are very weak arguments. the reasons are : a. vadanti tat verse does not talk about gradation of the transcendentalists but just how different seers describe the absolute. it is only the purport talks about such gradation. b. the isopanishad verse (hiranmayena) is not a direct evidence for brahma jyoti. it only means that the lord is glowing wonderfully like millions of suns despite his dark complexion. 3. as far as brahma bhuta verse goes, gaudiyas a. take param to mean transcendental and pure by gaudiyas b. in the next verse, mAm is taken to mean enter in to the "kingdom of god" what i think is the most direct meaning of mam namely "me" is taken by sankara. for param he takes the meaning as supreme, which is also direct. sankara explains that a. a jivan mukta acts with supreme devotion b. sankara justifies that a jivan mukta's devotion is supreme has been confirmed by the lord in 7.16 c. that a jivan mukta acts in this way is confirmed in brhadaranyaka upanishad (3.5.1) also - says sankara. d. through this kind of devotion, a jivan mukta enters in to the lord (atma nivedanam described in 18.55). that this is can be so has been practically demonstrated even on earth by devotees such as meera, andal, thyagaraja etc. you may question how a jiva can cease to be. but that it can be so is confirmed by the lord also in 7.6. on the other hand, the gaudiya interpretation that a self-realized soul attains pure devotion and then the kingdom of god makes the state of sel-realization subject to multiple changes. this contradicts what the lord says in 2.16 that the eternal is unchanging. 4. in the case of param brahman, gaudiyas take the meaning of param to be supreme so that they can establish that krishna is the supreme brahman in the class of brahmans. but this is not correct because plurality of brahmans is not established through any direct reference. it is interesting that one does not take param to mean transcendental. the vaishnavas sometimes call sankara a word juggler for doing exactly the same thing - taking appropriate meaning as per context. in this verse, sankara takes param brahman to refer to the lord - supreme self. this is consistent with his usage of words in the purport to brahmano hi verse also where he considers the brahman to mean the supreme self, the lord. one may object that the lord cannot be supreme if there is no other entity in his category. but there are different entities in the category of gods is recognized by sankara in his sariraka bhashya, where he says that this supreme lord preceded all gods. this is not to say there are many gods. this aspect of sankara's commentary can be understood when one understands that his philosophy is "polymorphic monotheism of cosmic self". that the supreme lord is krishna, rama etc., is confirmed in the same chapter on the opulence of the absolute. sankara also very clearly recognizes that this supreme lord is sri govinda. but as a matter of fact some do see him in his other forms. yours humbly rajaram v. Somesh Kumar <tp_somesh_kumar wrote: Hare Krishna Prabhuji, My humble obeisances to you and Bhakti Vikas Swamiji! I am not qualified to make any comment on this spiritual matter, but it's only due to the intelligence given by Krishna that I am trying to address your points Rajaram : 1. 14.27 should continue what was spoken in 14.26 or else there is a defect of incoherance, which is not possible in the words of the lord. therefore, 14.27 should describe the lord or the brahman platform that was talked about in the previous verse. Answer: 14.27 is surely talking about the Brahman platform. Krishna is saying "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" - Brahman is resting on Me. which is what even the Ishopanishad says: "Hiranmayena Patrena Satyasya Apahita Mukham" - The pure devotee asking the Lord to remove the glaring effulgence which is covering the transcendental face of the Lord! ---------- Rajaram: 14.26 talks about a pure devotee attaining brahman. as per gaudiyas, a pure devotee does not desire sayujya mukti. therefore how can 14.27 talk about brahma jyoti ? Answer: Brahman stage is the first stage in the spiritual realization. The Brahman stage means practically applying the "Aham Brahmaasmi" principle, which means to practically know that "I am the Spirit Soul" and not the body made of the five material elements, nor the mind nor the intellegence and nor the false ego! But there is a stage beyond this "Aham Brahmaasmi" stage and that is told by Krishna Himself: "Brahma Bhuta Prasannaatmaa, Na Shochati Na Kankshati, Samah Sarveshu Bhuteshu, Mad Bhakti Labhate Param" These transcendental words from Sri Krishna clearly says that the Supreme Transcendental devotional service platform towards Krishna is a stage which is attained after the "Aham Brahmaasmi" or the Brahma bhuta stage! In that context 14.27 is very clear where Krishna is again stating the same - Saying that Brahman is subordinate to Him - "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham"! Rajaram: 2. also, how can gaudiyas assign qualities such as ultimate happiness to brahman having said that it is devoid of ananda ? one may say that is sukha and not ananda that is referred to in the verse and so it is not a defect. Answer: What is said is that Brahman realisation is the realisation of the "Sat" - Truth feature of the Lord Sri Krishna. Paramaatmaa realisation is the "Chit" - Knowledge feature of the Lord and Bhagavaan realisation is the realisation of the "Ananda" - Bliss feature of the Lord. As stated in Srimad Bhaagavatam: "Vadanti Tat Tattva Vidas, Tattvam Yad Jnyanam Advayam, Brahmeti Paramaatmeti, Bhagavaan Iti Shabdyate" -- Rajaram: but then the pure devotees would not benefit from attaining such a platform. Answer: Your statement can be answered by the fact that once a pure devotee realis es the Bhagavaan aspect of Sri Krishna all the other aspects are already realised, because of other aspects being subordinate to Bhagavaan Sri Krishna! -- Rajaram: 3. the gaudiyas may defend saying that the verse 14.27 clarifies the difference between brahman platform (goloka) referred to in 14.26 and the brahma jyoti. but having not talked about brahma jyoti anywhere before in the gita, there is no need for clarifying. Answer: Please have a look at Srila Prabhupada's purport for 14.26 - http://www.asitis.com/14/26.html and 14.27 - http://www.asitis.com/14/27.html He is clearly referring to Brahman stated by Sri Krishna to be the "Aham Brahmaasmi" - I am the Pure Spirit Soul position and not to to Goloka. And he clearly states in His purports that the oneness which the living entity perceives at the Brahman realisation stage is the oneness in terms of quality and not quantity. Otherwise Arjuna would not have addressed Sri Krishna as: "Param Brahma Param Dhaama, Pavitram Paramam Bhavaan, Purusham Shaashvatam Divyam, Aadi Devam Ajam Vibhum" ------- Rajaram: 4. also how can we defend the statement by hh sivarama swami maharaja that brahman is "disposable", when the lord says that brahman is eternal. Answer: I am not sure whather HH Sivarama Swami told this. Even if He has told this, it can be justified by the fact of Sri Krishna's assertion that "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham - Brahman is subordinate to Me". And since Brahman is subordinate to Sri Krishna, once the pure devotee starts enjoying the transcendental mellows (rasa) with the Lord because Krishna is "Raso Vai Sah" - full of Rasa, He does'nt want to listen about anything else then Sri Krishna's pastimes. At that time the mention of Brahman is not very palatable to the pure devotee of the Lord. And from this point of view you can understand the meaning of Sivarama Swami's statement. Surely no transcendentalist will argue the fact that Brahman is eternal, when it is said by Sri Krishna Himself! ---------- Rajaram: 5. the different vaishnava acharyas have different interpretation of what is referred to by brahman in verse 14.27 and therefore why is there is a contention with sankara's alone ? Answer: Shankaraachaarya is considered to be an incarnation of Lord Shiva and He had descended to achieve a specific objective and that was to make the people of that era understand the significance of Vedas and Shruti. That time people were becoming very much influenced by the "Nihilistic" Budhdhist philosophy, which rejected even the presence of Brahman. So Shankaraachaarya kindly lead those people in darkness to the light of Vedic literature by not clearly stating about the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but mentioning it in coded terms as Srila Vyasadeva mentioned about Sri Krishna in coded terms in "Brahma Sutra". --------------- Rajaram: each acharya purports based on his realization. Answer: This is true. And the greatness of this is that though each Achaaryas give their purports based on their realization, and sometimes it may even seem to be contradictory but finally everyone is referring to this simple statement that "Krishnas Tu Bhagavaan Swayam" that Krishna is "The Supreme Personality of Godhead" Hope my attempt to give answers helps you and also hope that you'll forgive me if you feel that I've said something wrong here. As said earlier, I am very much unqualified to do this, but only because of the intelligence given by Krishna I'm able to do it. --------- Hare Krishna! Dasanudasa, Somesh Bhakti Vikasa Swami <Bhakti.Vikasa.Swami wrote: The following text from R. Venkataramani makes some interesting points that Achintya-ites may like to address. it is nice to read the erudite discussion that his holiness sivarama swami had with the sankaracharya. it is saddening to hear that one who is a sankaracharya is calling the name and form of sri govinda are temporary, while adi sankara has asserted that the lord is eternal - satyam jnanam anantam nityam (sri govindashtakam). sadguna brahman means it is eternal or else it could not be called brahman. if krishna is maya, there is no need for the adi sankara to worship him. no other acharya but sankara has explicitly said (focussing on our lord sri krishna) "ekam devo devaki putra eva" (there is no god but the son of sri govinda, the sone of devaki. there is no sastra but the song of sri govinda, bhagavad gita. there is no activity but serving sri govinda. there is no mantra but the chanting of the names of sri govinda. to some extent i realize, the great devotion that each one in this forum is blessed with and request you to show your mercy that i become increasingly attached to sri govinda and chant his names properly, which is the reason for my joining this forum. however, permit me to defend sankara to prevent his great philosophy of pure devotion and absolute knowledge from being criticized because of potential flaws in the followers, which are present in all traditions due to the influence of time. the commentary of sri sankara is simple and direct on verse 14.27. that by worshipping the lord one comes to the brahman platform is stated in 14.26. according to sankara why this is so (given that generally forms are considered to be illusory) is explained in 14.27. the lord (brahman) is established in the self. use of brahman to refer to the lord is consistent with vedanta sutras and upanishads. also as the lord is referring not only to himself (in the form of krishna) but also his other personalities such as rama he is using brahman to refer to himself. thus it is appropriate to consider brahman (lord) is the subject both contextually & grammatically. the rest of the verse talks about the quality of this brahman (lord) namely eternality, ultimate bliss (raso vai sah), imperishability etc., which are reasons for a mumukshu to worship the lord. that the lord gives this state to the devotee indicates his mercy. i dont see what the flaw is in sankara's commentary and why he should be blasted while he is asking us to worship the lord. philosophy is an intellectual level framework, the acharyas provide us with to understand the incomprehensible absolute and impel us towards liberation. the vaishnava philosophies and the acharyas are noble for that. devotees, who dont intend to belittle sankara's achievements or his philosophy are requested not to read further on. but if one propounds that his tradition has the correct conclusion and is more ancient than sankara's, then let them please defend their faith. 1. 14.27 should continue what was spoken in 14.26 or else there is a defect of incoherance, which is not possible in the words of the lord. therefore, 14.27 should describe the lord or the brahman platform that was talked about in the previous verse. 14.26 talks about a pure devotee attaining brahman. as per gaudiyas, a pure devotee does not desire sayujya mukti. therefore how can 14.27 talk about brahma jyoti ? 2. also, how can gaudiyas assign qualities such as ultimate happiness to brahman having said that it is devoid of ananda ? one may say that is sukha and not ananda that is referred to in the verse and so it is not a defect. but then the pure devotees would not benefit from attaining such a platform. 3. the gaudiyas may defend saying that the verse 14.27 clarifies the difference between brahman platform (goloka) referred to in 14.26 and the brahma jyoti. but having not talked about brahma jyoti anywhere before in the gita, there is no need for clarifying. 4. also how can we defend the statement by hh sivarama swami maharaja that brahman is "disposable", when the lord says that brahman is eternal. 5. the different vaishnava acharyas have different interpretation of what is referred to by brahman in verse 14.27 and therefore why is there is a contention with sankara's alone ? each acharya purports based on his realization. The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2003 Report Share Posted October 16, 2003 My humble obeisances! All glories to Srila Prabhupada! Regarding your statement: "hh bhakti vikas maharaj is a great devotee and an accomplished sannyasi. it is improper etiquette on your part to offer obeisances to him and an ordinary lay person like me in the same breadth as in your mail. request you to correct the same going forward. " First of all, Thank You Very Much, for telling me about my great offence. I hope that Bhakti Vikas Swami Maharaja Ji, being such an exalted Vaishnava spreading Krishna conciousness all over the world, will forgive the offence this great offender. Rajaram: as you said, philosophy should lead us to devotion towards the supreme lord sri govinda. and who can question the efficacy of the teachings of vaishnava acharyas in that ? it is due to their unconditional love and untiring service that the seed of devotion is sown in different barren lands (conditioned jivas). Answer: I fully agree with you here. No doubt about it! Rajaram: a. gaudiya devotees dont want to attain the brahma jyoti (14.26) but they still get it. Answer: This is because Bhagavaan Sri Krishna is the basis of the impersonal Brahmajyothi as stated by Krishna Himself: "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" . It's similar to the concept, as Srila Prabhupada often mentions, that if you have thousand rupees than ten rupees is already in it. So similarly, attaining personal relationship with Sri Krishna includes the Brahman realisation also in it, because Brahman is sub-ordinate to the transcendental Supreme Personality of Godhead Sri Krishna. Rajaram: b. the lord says that brahman is eternal (14.27) but for gaudiyas it is a temporary state to be replaced by active transcendental devotional service. also brahman platform has the risk of falling down.c. the lord says brahman is ultimate in happiness but gaudiyas dont accept it. for them there is no ananda in aham brahmasmi realization and that is why brahman realized souls may fall down and take up material activities. Answer: These two statements can be understood by this verse from Srimad Bhagavatam, which is written by Srila Veda Vyasa, who himself has written Brahma Sutra and Srimad Bhagavatam is the Bhaashya of Brahma Suutra by Srila Veda Vyasa Himself. The verse is: "Ye'nye Arvindaaksha Vimukta Maaninas, Tvayy Asta Bhavaad Avishudhdha Budhdhaya, Aruhya Krchchena Param Padam Tatah, Patanty Adhah, Anadrta Yusmad Anghrayah" This means that "Anyone who does'nt surrender to the Lotus-eyed Lord Sri Krishna and thinks himself to be liberated, his intellgence is not purified yet. Though he reaches the Topmost state by very severe austerities. But, he falls down, because he has failed to surrender to the Lotus feet of the Lord." So this verse clearly indicates the Supremacy of the Lotus feet of the Lotus-eyed Lord which is in accordance with what Krishna has said as "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" Rajaram: on the other hand, if you take brahman to mean the lord as sankara does, then there is no such contradiction. it is appropriate to call him ultimate in happiness and eternal. Answer: Brahman is not the Lord. Krishna is saying "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" - "Brahman is resting on Me". Also the Srimad Bhagavatam starts with "Om Namo Bhagavate Vaasudevaaya" and then "Janmadyasya Yatah". So first of all offering respects to the sun of Vaasudeva, Sri Krishna - The Supreme Personality of Godhead, and then stating that everything is emanating from Sri Krishna! Rajaram: a. vadanti tat verse does not talk about gradation of the transcendentalists but just how different seers describe the absolute. it is only the purport talks about such gradation. Answer: If you see the "Vadanti Tat..." verse with respect to "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" said by Krishna. Then it's very clear. Is'nt it? That realising the Supreme Personality of Godhead Sri Krishna is the highest stage of transcendental realisation. Rajaram: b. the isopanishad verse (hiranmayena) is not a direct evidence for brahma jyoti. it only means that the lord is glowing wonderfully like millions of suns despite his dark complexion. Answer: I'll again state the same verse told by Sri Krishna "Brahmano Hi Pratishthaaham" and "Janmadyasya Yatah" - Krishna is the basis of Brahman and everything is emanating from Sri Krishna, including His own glowing effulgence, which you may or may not recognize as Brahmajyothi! Rajaram: 3. as far as brahma bhuta verse goes, gaudiyas a. take param to mean transcendental and pure by gaudiyas b. in the next verse, mAm is taken to mean enter in to the "kingdom of god" Answer: a. Yes Param is Transcendental or Supreme. b. I think you're mentioning the verse: "Bhaktyaa Maam Abhijaanaati,..... Vishate Tadanantaram" Krishna is not saying "Vishate Maam Tadantaram". Then you can say that Krishna says the Bhakta will merge in Me. But Krishna says "Vishate Tadanantaram" meaning "he enters". And who enters - It is Bhakta. And what is the basis of Bhakti? Bhakta and Bhagavaan - BOTH! At another place Krishna says: Satatam Kiirtayanto Maam, Yatantashcha Dhrdhavrataa, Namasyantashcha Maam Bhaktya, NityaYukta Upasate Rajaram: a. a jivan mukta acts with supreme devotion b. sankara justifies that a jivan mukta's devotion is supreme has been confirmed by the lord in 7.16 c. that a jivan mukta acts in this way is confirmed in brhadaranyaka upanishad (3.5.1) also - says sankara. Answer: I fully agree with you here. The devotee is always continuously glorifying Lord, even after liberation. In fact constant glorification of the Lord by actions,mind and intelligence is liberation, as stated by Srila Rupa Goswaami - "Iha Yasya Harer Dasya, Karmana Manasa Gira, Nikhilasv Api Avasthaasu JiivanMukta Sa Uchyate" Rajaram: d. through this kind of devotion, a jivan mukta enters in to the lord (atma nivedanam described in 18.55). that this is can be so has been practically demonstrated even on earth by devotees such as meera, andal, thyagaraja etc. Answer: There are five kinds of Muktis: 1) Sayujya 2) Salokya 3) Samipya 4) Sarupya and 5) Sarsti So, depending on the taste of the transcendentalist he gets a particular kind of liberation. But for a devotee who is firmly convinced of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Sri Krishna to be the basis of Brahman the first kind of liberation is like hell. Why? Because he is in relation with the source of Brahman. Please do try to understand! As stated by Shukadev Gosvami : "Ittham Sataam Brahma Sukhaanubhutyaa ... Krta Punya Punjah" - "Here is the source of Brahma sukha playing with his friends..." Rajaram: you may question how a jiva can cease to be. but that it can be so is confirmed by the lord also in 7.6. Answer: 7.6 confirms the statement "Janmadyasya Yatah" from Srimad Bhaagavatam. Rajaram: on the other hand, the gaudiya interpretation that a self-realized soul attains pure devotion and then the kingdom of god makes the state of sel-realization subject to multiple changes. this contradicts what the lord says in 2.16 that the eternal is unchanging. Answer: Krishna says: "Bhaktya Maam Abhijaanaati" Only a bhakta can know Me. And what is the result of knowing Krishna. It's stated by Krishna: "Janma Karmam Cha Me Divyam, Evam Yo Vetti Tattvatah, Tyaktvaa Deham Punar Janmam, Naiti Maam Eti So'rjuna" Krishna says : "Maam Eti" means "He comes to Me". Rajaram: 4. in the case of param brahman, gaudiyas take the meaning of param to be supreme so that they can establish that krishna is the supreme brahman in the class of brahmans. Answer: Param means Trascendental or Supreme. There's no doubt here. Rajaram: but this is not correct because plurality of brahmans is not established through any direct reference. it is interesting that one does not take param to mean transcendental. Answer: In Katha Upanishad it is stated and Srila Prabhupada quotes it often "Nityo Nityaanam, Chetanas Chetanaanaam, Eko Bahunaam, Yo Vidadhaati Kaamaan" "...He is the chief eternal among all the eternals.... He is the One who is maintaining all others ." Rajaram: in this verse, sankara takes param brahman to refer to the lord - supreme self. this is consistent with his usage of words in the purport to brahmano hi verse also where he considers the brahman to mean the supreme self, the lord. Answer: What is referred to as Supreme self is the Paramaatma realisation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Sri Krishna! Rajaram: one may object that the lord cannot be supreme if there is no other entity in his category. but there are different entities in the category of gods is recognized by sankara in his sariraka bhashya, where he says that this supreme lord preceded all gods. this is not to say there are many gods. this aspect of sankara's commentary can be understood when one understands that his philosophy is "polymorphic monotheism of cosmic self". that the supreme lord is krishna, rama etc., is confirmed in the same chapter on the opulence of the absolute. Answer: Don't you think there's too much of logical thinking involved here. That's why Krishna says: "Kleshoadhikaras Teshaam Avyaktaaasakta Chetasaam... Dehavadbhir Avaapyate - " The path of impersonalism is very difficult ...." Therefore the best method is as Krishna says: "Mayya Veshya Mano Ye Maam, Nitya Yukta Upasate ... Te Me Yuktatamah Matah" - "Just think of Krishna's transcendental form and activities and glorify Him constantly" Rajaram: sankara also very clearly recognizes that this supreme lord is sri govinda. but as a matter of fact some do see him in his other forms. Answer: Yes Shankaraachaarya says : "Bhaja Govinda, Bhaja Govindam, Govindam Bhaja, Mudhamate" OK. I will take the other forms to be Gopala, Giridhaari, Muraari, Kamsaari, RadhaaRaman ........ Hare Krishna! Thank You Very Much once again Rajaramanji for telling me about my mistake. Hopefully Krishna will give me the intelligence so that I will not do it again! Take care. Dasanudasa, Somesh The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2003 Report Share Posted October 17, 2003 My humble obeisances to you! All glories to Srila Prabhupada! The good thing if we discuss in Achintya group is that other participants who have surely more knowledge and realization than me can participate in the discussions. Our discussion is not argument, we are trying to understand the philosophy of Bhagavad Gita. The most important thing we have to note for understanding the topmost secret of Bhagavada Gita is that we have to surrender to Krishna! As Arjuna says to Krishna "Shishyas Te Ham Shadi, Maam Tvaam Prapannam". And Krishna also says to Arjuna "Bhakto'si Me Sakha Cheti, Rahasyam Hy Etad Uttamam" - "You are my devotee and friend that's why you understand this transcendental secret". One more thing is though I said that we're trying to understand by discussion, but discussion which is using too much intelligence to understand the transcendental topic will not yield much. This is because as Srila Rupa Gosvaami says: "Sevonmukhe Hi Jihvaadau, Svayam Eva Sphurati Adhah" - If we try to serve Sri Krishna by our senses starting from tongue by chanting "Hare Krishna" mahaamantraa, then Krishna will reveal Himself to us. Also one more thing is "Lord is self-situated" as told by Shankaraachaaryaa is Truth, as He is seeing Sri Krishna in the Brahman position. And Brahmajyoti is situated in Lord is Truth as well, because the Gaudiyas are seeing Sri Krishna as Param Brahma or as Bhagavaan - The Supreme Personality of Godhead. Hare Krishna! Dasanudasa, Somesh Rajaram Venkataramani <v_raja_ram > wrote: hare krishna somesh prabhu - please accept my humble obeisances. all glories to sri guru and sri govinda. i am not on achintya group and you may bounce it to them if you want. my giving you arguments will only harden your stand but if you want we can discuss over phone 91-44-2471-9405 or let me know if i should defend at all. pl. note that we are debating what is correct interpretation of brahmano hi verse : - the lord is self situated as said by sankara or - the brahma jyoti is situated in the lord as stated by gaudiyas if you read your response, you will see you are using circular logic to establish your point. you are taking the gaudiya interpretation is correct to defend the same. that is incorrect. yours humbly rajaram v. The New with improved product search The New with improved product search 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.