isopanishad's first sloka indicates advaita philosophy

[sambya]

ISOPANISHAD'S FIRST SLOKA :

 

om purnamadah purnamidang purnat purnamudachyate

purnasya purnamadaya purnamebabshishyate. .

 

translation according to iskcon:

 

supreme bhagavan is complete whole(purna) in every way.as he is complete whole whatever comes out from him , like this material world,is also complete whole in every way.whatever is generated from complete whole is also complete whole.and his wholeness(Purnata) remains unaffected inspite of the fact that, numerous completely whole entities are emering out of him.

 

polite question to iskconites : isnt this the most authentic description of advaita? please stick to literal interpretations while you answer.

[Amlesh]

The best person to answer this is Dark Warrior.

He knows that best.

[bija]

Dear Sambya, it would take some time to open up the finer intricacies of Gaudiya philosophy, and much patience on behalf of all involved in the discussion if it is to take place - considering our various philisophical perpspectives and persuasions. Maybe some Iskcon person would like to share, as your question is asking them, I am not an Iskcon person.

 

Here is one fundamental point of Gaudiya Vaisnava philsophy: The material world is not false, but temporary. The verse you presented from Isopanisad is not pointing to the material temporary illusion (based on sense gratification), but instead to the spiritual fact and reality. The essential nature of the Complete Whole and parts...Non-Dual Absolute Truth.

 

Here is some thoughts on the Gaudiya perspective of living fully without negation. And some thoughts of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja to further clarify my point....please do take time to read the full post...

 

What interests me deeply about the spirituality and path in line with Sri Gauranga is this:

 

 

Srila BR Sridhara Maharaja has expressed the essence of the philosophy in a title of one of his books ' Positive and Progressive Immortality'. The so-called Monistic and Buddhist paths negate and reject, leading to void or emptiness or Impersonal Supreme Truth. But our path as Gaudiya's is very different.

 

 

 

The world is like a field full of delicious fruits, owned by the Supreme Enjoyer. If we plan to enjoy the fruits of this field directly the outcome is not good. Both the Buddhist and the Monist have realized the suffering involved with sensous enjoyment. Suffering being one of the core fundamental beliefs of the theory of conditioned life. So both these philosophers are sitting in a field trying to negate what they see, and thus speculating that the Original substance is nothing like the field that allures and causes so much pain. Therefore the field can be a place of temptation or torment for one craving emancipation. Thus total rejection of that encounter, classing it as false or dreamlike passing substance.

 

 

The Vaisnava philospher is very different than these two other philosophers. He/She has realized service mood and utilization. Realizing that the fruits of the field are actually for the Supreme Enjoyer - the Supremely Sensous. So the servant gathers 'all good things' worthy of offering and places them at the Masters feet. The Masters kindness is so great, and His love for the surrendered servant so profound, that He shares his bounty in love revealing Himself to the devotee as both immanent and transcendent. The kingdom of God.

 

 

This is the great skill of cultivation involved in the Vaisnava philosophy, and what I have tried to express in personal life and realization, in regards to seeing others as perfect parts of the Perfect Whole. In regards to developing deeper spiritual vision. Krsna consciousness.

 

 

Sri Krsna is Beauty and Charm - the essence of all things. The ghastly perversion seen by the materialist, is only due to gross sense gratification, neglecting the Original Purpose. The Divine Reality is explained in Sri Isopanisad in this verse you have quoted, and is not just the monolopy of an institution (Iskcon), but is the inherent substance of all beings, even the animals and the fragrance of the air. Supreme Divine. A reality free from grossness and sense gratification.

 

As sadhaka's, this is our cultivation - a life of application.

 

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja explains the philosophy so beautifully below.

 

 

 

 

Relative Worlds by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada - click here

Chapter 2 - The Answers Revealed

 

The enjoyer of the objects, as well as the enjoyed objects, are both situated in a tentative position of time. As the provisional existence and activities are captivated in a part of time, these discrepancies should be redressed to have a proper solution of these puzzling questions. We deal with shaky non-absolute things. So we should have an inner desire to know the direction of the Absolute. We have had an irrepressible function of handling the phenomena by our senses, and also the objects of manipulation of the senses are found to be transformable. Because we are compelled to select our position at a place where there is no trouble, we therefore seek for deserting ourselves from all limited platforms.

 

Association with the phenomenal objects has given vent to disruption, so dissociation is picked up as a remedy. How to handle this function should be the next question. By dissociation we mean to get rid of the relativity of knowledge - to sacrifice our cognitive principle, as is inculcated by a certain school. Maximisation of knowledge might swallow up the two different positions of observed and observer, and will proselytise to singular observation. In that case the uninterrupted knowledge cannot fly rationally without the two wings of Eternity and Bliss, although this seems to be secured by laboured dissociation of manifestation.

 

When we ascertain that non-cooperation will give us what we have sought, do we mean to make ourselves abstain from all necessities of life, in order to gain perfect dissociation from the imperfected objects? The answer will be 'no'. We need not put a stop to receiving the necessities of life, but we accept those functional activities necessary for our definite purpose. We will welcome the manifestive aspect and finite inadequate things to serve as ingredients facilitating the Eternal Blissful Knowledge, without any reference to our dislocated enjoying mood. If they form to be of any use to the Absolute, the temporal and faulty phases are indirectly removed from the conception of such things. So we need not have any apprehension as to their unsuitability and will discern the immaculated aspect of those things, which otherwise prove snares to us if they are monopolised for our impure purpose.

 

The insipid situation of an impersonal conception need not predominate over us as a settled fact. At the removal of our enjoying aspiration in Connection with our temporal entities, we would naturally associate such things as elements incorporated with the Absolute.

 

Then comes the question, "What are the salient features of the Absolute and what should be the nomenclature of the Absolute?" The Absolute is evidently to welcome all sorts of manifestive nature, instead of lurking Himself as the unknown in a region beyond our sensuous scope. Our sensuos activities are hitherto confined in non-absolute, and when we care most for the immutable situation of the Absolute, no mutability should dissuade us from our targetted object. If we can clear our position from serving transformable objects, and when we have only singular motive of serving the immutable Absolute, we must trace the connection of all manifestive things with Him. This will give us the much coveted situation of continuing our living adivities in His service in this world too, without an undesirable attitude of enjoying the same.

 

The burden of enjoyment is now shifted to the Absolute, and we, being His irregular subservients, help Him in serving by these ingredients, which are His imperishables, though they were acknowledged by us to have been meant for our use. So the greatest facility is accorded by our serving temper, in place of our wrong enjoying mood which proves fruitless in the long run.

 

Dissociation from undesirable things, when we have a view of the Eternal Blissfull Knowledge, will be exactly dovetailed if we can trace out their connection with the Absolute, having no bearing of co-sharing with them, but simply to welcome them with a consideration that they have only Eternal association.

 

We meet men who cherish the view of dissociating themselves from all manifestive features of phenomena in their would-be emancipation, and who want to deprive them of their utility in order to gain the full scope of impersonation. They are found to non-cooperate with the earthly phenomena under the apprehension of having been entangled with such association. As they have no knowledge of their self, or have misguided conception of self - like a cow mistaking under an old apprehension the red clouds as flames of burning fire - they want to flee from the very nature of the transitory perspective aspects of the phenomena.

 

A failure of true detection compels them to exhibit their diffidence of accepting the wholesale manifestive nature of even the Transcendence. They want to carry their defective impression to the Transcendence, considering the Transcendental Region to be identical with the prison of mundane phenomena. So it should be a matter of grave consideration whether to show our back to all aspects, by turning ourselves to follow the undifferenced monistic phase of the Absolute.

 

The view of the Transcendental subjectivity in our present activity is more or less misunderstood. So to get relief from such erroneous impression we must not neglect to utilise everything, as far as possible, for the service of the Absolute; and must not participate in the views of miscarried decision of the impersonalists. If we do not do so, we will class ourselves among the imprudent.

 

Four years after His meeting with Raya Ramananda, in the early part of 1516, the Supreme Lord as an ascetic met Sanatana Goswami for the second time. The latter asked his Master to enlighten him regarding his own self and the threefold troubles he has to meet during his journey of life. The Lord taught him that human souls are eternal karsnas: they have originated from the borderland energy of Absolute, Shri Krishna, with the neighbouring dominions of phenomena and transcendence on two sides.

 

The subservient souls, being simultaneously associated with and dissociated from the Absolute, are themselves no positive substratum, but merely distinguished from the Absolute by their quantitative designation of energy. Forgetful of their true situation, they are susceptible to isolate themselves by enwrapping with foreign quality from the Absolute, whereas they have the same quality as the Absolute, with a magnitudinal variegated position.

 

This very Transcendental Absolute Truth has disclosed the two-fold aspects of relativity, reigning in the temporal mundane sphere, as well as in the Transcendental Eternal Plane. So the question of relativity is to be treated in these two aspects independently, without subscribing to opinions of impersonalists who have no other treasure to explain away the phenomena in derogatory situation.

 

On the western banks of the Ganges, close to the Panchanada Bathing Ghat, the retired administrative authority welcomed the Transcendental description of Full Knowledge, Who was never confined to the empirical activities of the learned renunciators, including Prakashananda Saraswati, who was inculcating avoidance of mundane relativity of knowledge. His high-sounding pedantic feats were properly cowed down by the Master, Who posed to be a member of the impersonalistic school. The band of impersonalists, who were known to have gained the civic guardianship of India from time immemorial, got the true impression of the Ever-Immutable Undeviated Relative Knowledge.

 

Sanatana showed himself as if busy with philosophic discourses by his external activities, and was posing in securing knowledge by participating in the views of empiricists. Not only did he exhibit the opportunity of audiencing the Transcendental Narratives of the different manifestations of the Transcendence Himself, but the positive view can also be secured by all honest followers of that great sage who will show a sincere aptitude to be associated by following Absolute delineations.

 

 

Maybe some other people would like to share their perspectives of what God is. To be honest Sambya I am hesitant to talk about God presently, as my conscience says, ' who am I to talk about the Supreme Great'. But hey, what else is there to do;).

 

your servant in love.

[bija]

 

...The verse you presented from Isopanisad is not pointing to the material temporary illusion (based on sense gratification), but instead to the spiritual fact and reality. The essential nature of the Complete Whole and parts...Non-Dual Absolute Truth... by bija

 

 

 

INVOCATION

oṁ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ

pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate

pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya

pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate

 

 

SYNONYMS

oṁ—the Complete Whole; pūrṇam—perfectly complete; adaḥ—that; pūrṇam—perfectly complete; idam—this phenomenal world; pūrṇāt—from the all-perfect; pūrṇam—complete unit; udacyate—is produced; pūrṇasya—of the Complete Whole; pūrṇam—completely, all; ādāya—having been taken away; pūrṇam—the complete balance; eva—even; avaśiṣyate—is remaining.

 

TRANSLATION

The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.

 

PURPORT

The Complete Whole, or the Supreme Absolute Truth, is the complete Personality of Godhead. Realization of impersonal Brahman or of Paramātmā, the Supersoul, is incomplete realization of the Absolute Complete. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha [Bs. 5.1]. Realization of impersonal Brahman is realization of His sat feature, or His aspect of eternity, and Paramātmā realization is realization of His sat and cit features, His aspects of eternity and knowledge. But realization of the Personality of Godhead is realization of all the transcendental features—sat, cit and ānanda, bliss. When one realizes the Supreme Person, he realizes these aspects of the Absolute Truth in their completeness. Vigraha means “form.” Thus the Complete Whole is not formless. If He were formless, or if He were less than His creation in any other way, He could not be complete. The Complete Whole must contain everything both within and beyond our experience; otherwise He cannot be complete.

The Complete Whole, the Personality of Godhead, has immense potencies, all of which are as complete as He is. Thus this phenomenal world is also complete in itself. The twenty-four elements of which this material universe is a temporary manifestation are arranged to produce everything necessary for the maintenance and subsistence of this universe. No other unit in the universe need make an extraneous effort to try to maintain the universe. The universe functions on its own time scale, which is fixed by the energy of the Complete Whole, and when that schedule is completed, this temporary manifestation will be annihilated by the complete arrangement of the Complete Whole.

All facilities are given to the small complete units (namely the living beings) to enable them to realize the Complete Whole. All forms of incompleteness are experienced due to incomplete knowledge of the Complete Whole. The human form of life is a complete manifestation of the consciousness of the living being, and it is obtained after evolving through 8,400,000 species of life in the cycle of birth and death. If in this human life of full consciousness the living entity does not realize his completeness in relation to the Complete Whole, he loses the chance to realize his completeness and is again put into the evolutionary cycle by the law of material nature.

Because we do not know that there is a complete arrangement in nature for our maintenance, we make efforts to utilize the resources of nature to create a so-called complete life of sense enjoyment. Because the living entity cannot enjoy the life of the senses without being dovetailed with the Complete Whole, the misleading life of sense enjoyment is illusion. The hand of a body is a complete unit only as long as it is attached to the complete body. When the hand is severed from the body, it may appear like a hand, but it actually has none of the potencies of a hand. Similarly, living beings are part and parcel of the Complete Whole, and if they are severed from the Complete Whole, the illusory representation of completeness cannot fully satisfy them.

The completeness of human life can be realized only when one engages in the service of the Complete Whole. All services in this world—whether social, political, communal, international or even interplanetary—will remain incomplete until they are dovetailed with the Complete Whole. When everything is dovetailed with the Complete Whole, the attached parts and parcels also become complete in themselves.

[sambya]

dear bija ,ive read through your posts and liked your humble style of apporach with a spirit of discussion. and definitely i should mention in the that we are no one to speculate about god ,having not seen him personally.

 

 

 

TRANSLATION

The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.

 

 

my translation might have sounded a bit different because i did that myself from the original vernacular texts.i kept the meaning intact though.

 

 

INVOCATION

oṁ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ

pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate

pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya

pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate

 

 

SYNONYMS

oṁ—the Complete Whole; pūrṇam—perfectly complete; adaḥ—that; pūrṇam—perfectly complete; idam—this phenomenal world; pūrṇāt—from the all-perfect; pūrṇam—complete unit; udacyate—is produced; pūrṇasya—of the Complete Whole; pūrṇam—completely, all; ādāya—having been taken away; pūrṇam—the complete balance; eva—even; avaśiṣyate—is remaining.

 

 

here i would beg to differ.as i have studied sanskrit i could clearly see the mistakes in translations.

 

the word 'purnam' means completely perfect or absolutewhole.but in this translation it is being interpreted as completely perfect,complete unit or complete balance.'purnam' has nothing to do with 'balance' or 'unit' .

 

the word om does not mean complete whole in this context.as this sloka is used as the mangalacharan in the begining of the book it is used as a auspicious symbol.just like most mantras start with an om.

 

most importantly nowhere there is a mention of 'personality of godhead'.

it says --- " purna adah " meaning 'that is complete whole'

" purna idam " meaning 'this is complete whole"

 

now this two words are are interpreted by most philosophies as under :

 

THAT --- god or ultimate truth or brahman

THIS --- the manifested cosmos.

 

where does the personality of god comes in .isnt this a shocking twist to the interpretations ?as my understanding of sanskrit might not be perfect one is free to get the texts interpreted by any learned proffessor of sanskrit and he would instantly see the results.

 

definitely i dont mean to say that god cannot be personal.he is personal , impersonal and also beyond those earthly concepts.

 

Vigraha means “form.” Thus the Complete Whole is not formless. If He were formless, or if He were less than His creation in any other way, He could not be complete. The Complete Whole must contain everything both within and beyond our experience; otherwise He cannot be complete.

 

excellent said. but that would apply to impersonal god too. concepts like impersonallity and formlessness are real and true in this world.many objects in this earth are formless. so can god be short of a characteristics that even inanimate objects created by him has?

 

god is infinite.its wrong to limit god by drawing a line and proclaiming god can be only such and such and nothing more.he can much much beyond what we can comprehend.he is our lovable krishna,respected nrishimha and impersonal brahman all at the same time.if somebody asks 'how is all that possible at the same time?' then the answer would be--"that is why we call him god."

its for us to choose what aspect in him do we like the most and to follow accordingly and it is highly unwise to assume that everyone would have the same liking.

 

ALL GLORIES TO 'PURNAM'

[bhaktajan]

Sambya,

You have learned to read so well!

 

Keep on reading our dear Isopanisad--

[which was selected by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami (n.1896-1977) for his translation work, because it presents the Vedic Version of a Single-Godhead etc etc etc] --Keep on reading, yes, keep reading all of those other 17 verses.

 

Pusan = Person.

 

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

"authentic description of advaita?" --Why are you asking without stating your intention, aka, goal of your discourse.

You are NOT impeded from pontificating in these forums to your hearts delight [albeit, 'you your void's delight'].

 

The goal of Advaita = Adviata

 

and,

 

The means of Advaita = the study of the machinations of the material world --in addition to moment-to-moment yoga-disciplined 'Self-observation'.

 

The Goal is called Advaita.

 

The means to the goal is called the "study of Advaita".

 

WHEN WILL SAMBYA REVEAL THE TOPICS THAT COMPRISE "study of Advaita"???

 

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Please forgive me if my logic gives you a pain deep in your heart,

Bhaktajan!

[sambya]

thanks for making me laugh once more bhaktajan.your posts are such a funny delight between these serious discussions.

[bija]

Oh Sambya, you are asking some deep questions (considering your knowledge)...I will try my best to answer from what I have read from Gaudiya literature and interpretation. I will admit that I am limited in scope.

 

 

the word om does not mean complete whole in this context.as this sloka is used as the mangalacharan in the begining of the book it is used as a auspicious symbol.just like most mantras start with an om. by sambya

 

Yes it is used as an auspicious symbol. A symbol of representation of truth - a great symbol of the kingdom of God. In Gaudiya philosophy Om is considered non-different to Sri Krsna. Lord Krsna says in Sri Gita, that He is the syllable Om. So anything that has connection with Krsna in this world is supremely auspicious. This also includes the positive spiritual life of the sadhaka - who has seen deeper than gross matter (the illusory reflection of the brahmajyoti).

 

For example in Srimad Bhagavatam it is said:

 

 

 

Notes On The Bhagavata : full e-book click here

By Bhaktivinoda Thakura

 

The Bhagavat Explains Itself:

 

1. It is the fruit of the tree of thought (Vedas) mixed with the nectar of the speech of Shukadeva. It is the temple of spiritual love .... [it is] composed of 18,000 Shlokas. It contains the best part of the Vedas and Vedanta.

 

2. The Bhagavata is pre-eminently "the Book" in India. Once enter into it, and you are transplanted, as it were, into the spiritual world where gross matter has no existence. The true follower of the Bhagavat is a spiritual man who has already cut his temporary connection with phenomenal nature, and has made himself the inhabitant of that region where God eternally exists and loves. This mighty work is founded upon inspiration and its superstructure is upon reflection. To the common reader it has no charms and is full of difficulty. We are, therefore, obliged to study it deeply through the assistance of such great commentators as Shridhara Svami and Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and His contemporary followers.

 

3. Now Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the great preacher of Nadia, who has been Deified by His talented followers, tells us that the Bhagavat is founded upon the four verses which Vyasa received from Narada, the most learned of the created beings. He tells us further that Brahma pierced through the whole universe of matter for years and years in quest of the final cause of the world, but when he failed to find it abroad, he looked into the construction of his own spiritual nature, and there he heard the Universal Spirit speaking unto him:

 

4. "...I was in the beginning before all spiritual and temporal things were created, and after they have been created I am in them all in the shape of their existence and truthfulness, and when they will be all gone I shall remain full as I was and as I am. Whatever appears to be true without being a real fact itself, and whatever is not perceived though it is true in itself are subjects of my illusory energy of creation, such as light and darkness in the material world."

 

5. [Like Brahma, Vyasa also] fell back into his own self and searched his own spiritual nature and then it was that the above truth was communicated to him for his own good and the good of the world. The sage immediately perceived that his former works required supercession in as much as they did not contain the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In his new idea he obtained the development of his former idea of religion. He commenced the Bhagavat in pursuance of this change.

[bija]

 

most importantly nowhere there is a mention of 'personality of godhead'.

it says --- " purna adah " meaning 'that is complete whole'

" purna idam " meaning 'this is complete whole"

 

now this two words are are interpreted by most philosophies as under :

 

THAT --- god or ultimate truth or brahman

THIS --- the manifested cosmos.

 

where does the personality of god comes in .isnt this a shocking twist to the interpretations ?as my understanding of sanskrit might not be perfect one is free to get the texts interpreted by any learned proffessor of sanskrit and he would instantly see the results. by sambya

 

Yes your translation is not incorrect. But here is something very interesting: In Srimad Bhagavatam it is said that the Universe is the body of the Lord. It has also been said that such a description has been given for the neophyte so that he has some tangible subtsance to meditate upon.

 

Now, if we considered the Universe gross matter, such meditation would be a misleading meditation. But the sages well knew if the neophyte could be purified by such meditation on a tangible form of God, that eventually he would visualize in his heart the transcendental subject. This is what I have pointed to in my first post in this thread - and this is pointing to the Supreme Personality of Godhead Sambya. The Supreme Non-dual truth.

 

If our eyes are covered by gross vision, we cannot comprehend what is the Supreme Person, or any validity for any Personalism when discussing Pure Truth. But by devotional service, free of material endeavour, gradually Personalism opens up to the heart.

 

It has been said you know, service to sadhu is service to Krsna. One must question why is that? One must also question how is it that the devotee can see Sri Krsna everywhere? And in fact if he does not see Sri Krsna everywhere, then he is seeing illusion (as is suggested in the above Srimad Bhagavatam purport).

[bija]

 

definitely i dont mean to say that god cannot be personal.he is personal , impersonal and also beyond those earthly concepts.

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Vigraha means “form.” Thus the Complete Whole is not formless. If He were formless, or if He were less than His creation in any other way, He could not be complete. The Complete Whole must contain everything both within and beyond our experience; otherwise He cannot be complete. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

excellent said. but that would apply to impersonal god too. concepts like impersonallity and formlessness are real and true in this world.many objects in this earth are formless. so can god be short of a characteristics that even inanimate objects created by him has?

 

god is infinite.its wrong to limit god by drawing a line and proclaiming god can be only such and such and nothing more.he can much much beyond what we can comprehend.he is our lovable krishna,respected nrishimha and impersonal brahman all at the same time.if somebody asks 'how is all that possible at the same time?' then the answer would be--"that is why we call him god."

its for us to choose what aspect in him do we like the most and to follow accordingly and it is highly unwise to assume that everyone would have the same liking. by sambya

Yes indeed, what you say is very true. Many on this forum have seemed to misunderstand Gaudiya vision. In Gaudiya philosophy the impersonal manifestation of God is never negated. Infact in Gaudiya philosophy the only thing that is negated or rejected is selfish sense gratification (grossness).

 

In the Vedanta Sutra it is said that the living entity in relation to Atma (the Supreme Personality of Godhead) can choose to have spiritual form or not have spiritual form, once it has awoken to its potential (potency). This is all mentioned in the first section of Vedanta Sutra.

 

So what is rejected by Gaudiya philosophy is that there is nirguna and saguna brahma. Gaudiya says there is only nirguna. Correct me if I am wrong but some say that saguna brahma is the temporary manifestation of God (even Sri Krsna).

 

This was held in great disgust by Sri Caitanya as his Lord was considered Visnu Tattva. This Visnu Tattva is also mentioned in Vedanta Sutra commentary by Srila Baladeva Vidya Bhushan. Once again this points to the science of devotional service and surrender to the Lord's transcendental feet.

 

Nirguna is not considered to be formless, but simply without material form. Material form is not considered false, but temporary. So at some point when the jiva awakens to its Original subtsance the material actually becomes non-existent...and all things shine with spiritual light. This is once again poiting to the Supreme Non-dual Absolute Truth, and the Sri Isopanisad verse in question. And the deeper meaning of the syllable OM. And why Sri Krsna says in Gita, 'I AM that Syllable'.

[bija]

You may like to read further the Gaudiya understanding of sastra in the following verses:

 

 

TEXT 23

oṁ tat sad iti nirdeśo

brahmaṇas tri-vidhaḥ smṛtaḥ

brāhmaṇās tena vedāś ca

yajñāś ca vihitāḥ purā

 

 

om—indication of the Supreme; tat—that; sat—eternal; iti—that; nirdeśaḥ—indication; brāhmaṇāḥ—of the Supreme; tri-vidhaḥ—three kinds; smṛtaḥ—consider; brahmaṇaḥ—the brāhmaṇas; tena—therefore; vedāḥ—the Vedic literature; ca—also; yajñāḥ—sacrifice; ca—also; vihitāḥ—sacrifice; purā—formerly.

 

 

TRANSLATION

From the beginning of creation, the three syllables—om tat sat—have been used to indicate the Supreme Absolute Truth [brahman]. They were uttered by brāhmaṇas while chanting Vedic hymns and during sacrifices, for the satisfaction of the Supreme.

 

 

PURPORT

It has been explained that penance, sacrifice, charity and foods are divided into three categories: the modes of goodness, passion and ignorance. But whether first class, second class or third class, they are all conditioned, contaminated by the material modes of nature. When they are aimed at the Supreme—om tat sat, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the eternal—they become means for spiritual elevation. In the scriptural injunctions such an objective is indicated. These three words, om tat sat, particularly indicate the Absolute Truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In the Vedic hymns, the word om is always found.

One who acts without following the regulations of the scriptures will not attain the Absolute Truth. He will get some temporary result, but not the ultimate end of life. The conclusion is that the performance of charities, sacrifice and penance must be done in the mode of goodness. Performed in the modes of passion or ignorance, they are certainly inferior in quality. The three words om tat sat are uttered in conjunction with the holy name of the Supreme Lord, e.g., om tad viṣṇoḥ. Whenever a Vedic hymn or the holy name of the Supreme Lord is uttered, om is added. This is the indication of Vedic literature. These three words are taken from Vedic hymns. Om ity etad brahmaṇo nediṣṭaṁ nāma indicates the first goal. Then tattvamasi indicates the second goal. And sad eva saumya indicates the third goal. Combined they become om tat sat. Formerly when Brahmā, the first created living entity, performed sacrifices, he spoke these three names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The same principle holds by disciplic succession. So this hymn has great significance. Bhagavad-gītā recommends, therefore, that any work done should be done for om tat sat, or for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When one performs penance, charity, and sacrifice with these three words, he is acting in Krṣna consciousness. Kṛṣṇa consciousness is a scientific execution of transcendental activities which enables one to return home, back to Godhead. There is no loss of energy in acting in such a transcendental way.

 

 

 

Bg17.24

TEXT 24

tasmād oṁ ity udāhṛtya

yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-kriyāḥ

pravartante vidhānoktāḥ

satataṁ brahma-vādinām

 

 

tasmāt—therefore; om—beginning with om; iti—thus; udāhṛtya—indicating; yajña—sacrifice; dāna—charity; tapaḥ—penance; kriyāḥ—performances; pravartante—begins; vidhāna-uktāḥ—according to scriptural regulation; satatam—always; brahma-vādinām—of the transcendentalists.

 

 

TRANSLATION

Thus the transcendentalists undertake sacrifices, charities, and penances, beginning always with om, to attain the Supreme.

 

 

PURPORT

Om tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padam. The lotus feet of Viṣṇu are the supreme devotional platform. The performance of everything on behalf of the Supreme Personality of Godhead assures the perfection of all activity.

 

 

 

 

Bg17.25

TEXT 25

tad ity anabhisandhāya

phalaṁ yajña-tapaḥ-kriyāḥ

dāna-kriyāś ca vividhāḥ

kriyante mokṣa-kāṅkṣibhiḥ

tat—that; iti—they; anabhisandhāya—without fruitive result; phalam—result of sacrifice; yajña—sacrifice; tapaḥ—penance; kriyāḥ—activities; dāna—charity; kriyāḥ—activities; ca—also; vividhāḥ—varieties; kriyante—done; mokṣa-kāṅkṣibhiḥ—those who actually desire liberation.

 

 

TRANSLATION

One should perform sacrifice, penance and charity with the word tat. The purpose of such transcendental activities is to get free from the material entanglement.

 

 

PURPORT

To be elevated to the spiritual position, one should not act for any material gain. Acts should be performed for the ultimate gain of being transferred to the spiritual kingdom, back to home, back to Godhead.

 

 

 

 

Bg17.26-27

TEXTS 26–27

sad-bhāve sādhu-bhāve ca

sad ity etat prayujyate

praśaste karmaṇi tathā

sac-chabdaḥ pārtha yujyate

yajñe tapasi dāne ca

sthitiḥ sad iti cocyate

karma caiva tad-arthīyaṁ

sad ity evābhidhīyate

 

 

sat-bhāve—in the sense of the nature of the Supreme; sādhu-bhāve—in the sense of the nature of devotion; ca—also; sat—the Supreme; iti—thus; etat—this; prayujyate—is used; praśaste—bona fide; karmaṇi—activities; tathā—also; sat-śabdaḥ—sound; pārtha—O son of Pṛthā; yujyate—is used; yajñe—sacrifice; tapasi—in penance; dāne—charity; ca—also; sthitiḥ—situated; sat—the Supreme; iti—thus; ca—and; ucyate—pronounced; karma—work; ca—also; eva—certainly; tat—that; arthīyam—are meant; sat—Supreme; iti—thus; eva—certainly; abhidhīyate—is practiced.

 

 

TRANSLATION

The Absolute Truth is the objective of devotional sacrifice, and it is indicated by the word sat. These works of sacrifice, of penance and of charity, true to the absolute nature, are performed to please the Supreme Person, O son of Pṛthā.

 

 

PURPORT

The words praśaste karmaṇi, or prescribed duties, indicate that there are many activities prescribed in the Vedic literature which are purificatory processes beginning from parental care up to the end of one’s life. Such purificatory processes are adopted for the ultimate liberation of the living entity. In all such activities it is recommended that one should vibrate om tat sat. The words sad-bhāve and sādhu-bhāve indicate the transcendental situation. One who is acting in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is called sattva, and one who is fully conscious of activities in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is called svarūpa. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said that the transcendental subject matter becomes clear in the association of the devotees. Without good association, one cannot achieve transcendental knowledge. When initiating a person or offering the sacred thread, one vibrates the words om tat sat. Similarly, in all kinds of yogic performances, the supreme object, om tat sat is invoked. These words om tat sat are used to perfect all activities. This supreme om tat sat makes everything complete.

 

 

 

 

Bg17.28

TEXT 28

aśraddhayā hutaṁ dattaṁ

tapas taptaṁ kṛtaṁ ca yat

asad ity ucyate pārtha

na ca tat pretya no iha

 

 

aśraddhayā—without faith; hutam—performed; dattam—given; tapaḥ—penance; taptam—executed; kṛtam—performed; ca—also; yat—that which; asat—falls; iti—thus; ucyate—is said to be; pārtha—O son of Pṛthā; na—never; ca—also; tat—that; pretya—after death; no—nor; iha—in this

 

life.

 

 

TRANSLATION

But sacrifices, austerities and charities performed without faith in the Supreme are nonpermanent, O son of Pṛthā, regardless of whatever rites are performed. They are called asat and are useless both in this life and the next.

 

 

PURPORT

Anything done without the transcendental objective—whether it be sacrifice, charity or penance-is useless. Therefore, in this verse, it is declared that such activities are abominable. Everything should be done for the Supreme in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Without such faith, and without the proper guidance, there can never be any fruit. In all the Vedic scriptures, faith in the Supreme is advised. In the pursuit of all Vedic instructions, the ultimate goal is the understanding of Kṛṣṇa. No one can obtain success without following this principle. Therefore, the best course is to work from the very beginning in Kṛṣṇa consciousness under the guidance of a bona fide spiritual master. That is the way to make everything successful.

In the conditional state, people are attracted to worship demigods, ghosts, or Yakṣas like Kuvera. The mode of goodness is better than the modes of passion and ignorance, but one who takes directly to Kṛṣṇa consciousness is transcendental to all three modes of material nature. Although there is a process of gradual elevation, if one, by the association of pure devotees, takes directly to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is the best way. And that is recommended in this chapter. To achieve success in this way, one must first find the proper spiritual master and receive training under his direction. Then one can achieve faith in the Supreme. When that faith matures, in course of time, it is called love of God. This love is the ultimate goal of the living entities. One should, therefore, take to Krṣṇa consciousness directly. That is the message of this Seventeenth Chapter.

 

 

Full purports here (click icons):

 

BG 17.23:

 

BG 17.24:

 

BG 17.25:

 

BG 17.26-27:

 

BG 17.28:

[bija]

Now Sambya, that has about exhausted my knowledge on the subject;). Anything further from me may just be speculation.

 

y.s.

[theist]

I think people will hear and see what they want to in any sloka. If you accept the Vaisnava perspective or the Advaitin perspective you will be convinced that you are right and your opponent wrong. That is because Krishna from the heart is directing the individual according to that persons desires to remember Him or forget Him.

[Amlesh]

Thanks bija for outlining explanations from our school of thought which is really profound.

 

and Theist you are simply marvelous.

[gHari]

 

[..] his wholeness(Purnata) remains unaffected inspite of the fact that, numerous completely whole entities are emering out of him.

]..]

 

Clearly this speaks of two: the Supreme Entity (the Source) and many entities emerging from that One Supreme. Seems straightforward to me.

[sambya]

 

Yes indeed, what you say is very true. Many on this forum have seemed to misunderstand Gaudiya vision. In Gaudiya philosophy the impersonal manifestation of God is never negated. Infact in Gaudiya philosophy the only thing that is negated or rejected is selfish sense gratification (grossness).

 

its really good to come across a person like you in this forum having a broad outlook.that is what i've tried to explain everywhere in this forum.dont limit god.one need not worship the impersonal but dont deny its existence or importance.

 

 

 

So what is rejected by Gaudiya philosophy is that there is nirguna and saguna brahma. Gaudiya says there is only nirguna. Correct me if I am wrong but some say that saguna brahma is the temporary manifestation of God (even Sri Krsna).

 

 

i coudnt get you here.does gaudiya say only nirguna ? i thought its just the opposite.they stick to saguna instead.a little explanation would help.

 

its true that some does say that krishna is temporary mnifestation.i woundnt do that blunder.he is definitely permanent . god who is vakya man atit(beyond thought and speech) out of his causeless mercy and compassion appears to a gyanyogi as brahman realization and to a bhakti yogi as loving madhav.

as i said , no two persons conception regaurding god can be absolutely same.

 

 

Nirguna is not considered to be formless, but simply without material form.

 

thats true as per vaishnav doctrine.but in advaita , nirguna has a deeper and abstract meaning,not merly 'without attributes' or 'without material form' .

[sambya]

if one reads through the basic shastras he can easily find that there are two different bhavs expressed in it.some scriptures are predominantly bhakti scriptures like the puranas.whereas some like the upanishads(with a few exceptions) are mainly advaitic.both are invaluable to the respective school.theres no need to forcefully drag a bhakti text into the field of advaita or vice versa.

[sambya]

 

Clearly this speaks of two: the Supreme Entity (the Source) and many entities emerging from that One Supreme. Seems straightforward to me.

thats true indeed.it does look like two or dvaita.but it also says that complete whole units or entities are emerging from him. so god( THAT ) is being described as complete whole.and manifestations (THIS ) is also being described as complete whole. thats what the advaita say---brahman is obviously complete whole but even material creation is actually complete whole.

 

as complete whole cannot be two ( in case its two in number it would cease to be complete whole ) it has to be one (unity). advaita again !!!!!

[gHari]

 

if one reads through the basic shastras he can easily find that there are two different bhavs expressed in it.some scriptures are predominantly bhakti scriptures like the puranas.whereas some like the upanishads(with a few exceptions) are mainly advaitic.both are invaluable to the respective school.theres no need to forcefully drag a bhakti text into the field of advaita or vice versa.

Dvaita and Advaita are shown in the following diagram:

 

<center></center>

 

From one vantage the Truth appears to be advaita. Yet from another vantage the Truth appears to be Dvaita. However, it is neither one nor the other. It is both simultaneously, as pictured (a cone).

[sambya]

 

From one vantage the Truth appears to be advaita. Yet from another vantage the Truth appears to be Dvaita. However, it is neither one nor the other. It is both simultaneously, as pictured (a cone).

 

marvellous !!!! true indeed . since he is vakyamanatita and abaangmaanasagochara (not even narada or sukadev goswami could comprehend him totally) its wise to assume that he is everything that can be thought of and also everything that cannot be thought of.

[Sarva gattah]

 

quote=theist I think people will hear and see what they want to in any sloka. If you accept the Vaisnava perspective or the Advaitin perspective you will be convinced that you are right and your opponent wrong. That is because Krishna from the heart is directing the individual according to that persons desires to remember Him or forget Him

 

 

Dvaita and Advaita are shown in the following diagram:

 

 

<CENTER></CENTER>

 

From one vantage the Truth appears to be advaita. Yet from another vantage the Truth appears to be Dvaita. However, it is neither one nor the other. It is both simultaneously, as pictured (a cone).

 

Excellent realizations by DEVOTEES of Krsna!!!

[bija]

 

i coudnt get you here.does gaudiya say only nirguna ? i thought its just the opposite.they stick to saguna instead.a little explanation would help. by sambya

Sorry I was so late in replying, have had some internet connection problems.

 

Yes, I have read in Srila Prabhupada's writings that saguna brahman is not accepted in the Gaudiya school of thought. The philosophy is saying that Visnu does not come in contact directly with the material modes.

 

Previously you said Sambya that it is good we do not put limits on God. Infact this is the crux of the Gaudiya argument (by Sri Caitanya) - that God has multifarious energies! Basically Internal Potency, Marginal Potency and External Potency. The jiva soul (spark) can come under the sway of the External Energy due to its minute nature and being marginal...

 

Only the marginal jiva souls are considered to be able to come under the sway and illusion of this Maya (External) Shakti. Such is never the case with Sri Krsna.

 

So Nirguna is explained as being free of the gunas (goodness, passion, ignorance) influence.

 

The argument being complete because God cannot be limited to a Formelss Brahman with no energies. Sankaracarya, according to Gaudiya philosophers, put forward the theory that Nirguna Brahma is free of energy - therefore the introduction of Saguna Brahman theory.

 

When infact the Brahman described by Sri Caitanya is the complete Non-dual truth, complete with all energies. Also, with transcendental Personality, as well as formless attributes (impersonal), and all premeating attributes (super-soul). With complete diverse energies such as marginal souls and external illusory energy - in regards to the initial Sri Isopanisad verse that you quoted.

 

Sri Caitanya accepted Sri Krsna as Nirguna Brahman - with transcendental senses and personality. This is the mystery of Krsna consciousness for the sadhaka souls who have found themselves in this temporary world. They seek to find that Personality in all things through cultivation.

 

Here is a very clear description of the tattva - Relative Worlds by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada (click here).

 

 

thats true as per vaishnav doctrine.but in advaita , nirguna has a deeper and abstract meaning,not merly 'without attributes' or 'without material form' . by sambya

Often Sambya, some on this forum say that us Gaudiya's are misrepresenting Advaita philosophy, due to a poor fund of knowledge. So in this regard, a further elaboration from you, of nirguna's deeper meaning may be of benefit? I would appreciate hearing your understandings (as you have kindly given me an ear).

 

Really as gHari has pointed out, simultaneous oneness and difference is a very encompassing point of view. One that has newer and newer meanings and consequence for its adherants every day. I am sure the followers of Sankaracarya find a developing flavor too. Really it comes down to choice.

 

Personally I feel very pure devotees of Sri Caitanya wish to spread personalist conception because they can see that a soul has an intrinsic potential for that rasa. And I feel, would wish to inspire a soul to explore that field within their potency as spirit.

 

Contention is really only the field for neophytes like myself, who are caught in the relative field. If we can raise our vision, by the grace of sadhu and sastra, when can glimpse a higher field free of contention - then maybe we have become swanlike neophytes or madhyama class devotees.

[bija]

Quote:

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by gHari

Dvaita and Advaita are shown in the following diagram:

<center></center>

From one vantage the Truth appears to be advaita. Yet from another vantage the Truth appears to be Dvaita. However, it is neither one nor the other. It is both simultaneously, as pictured (a cone).

</td></tr></tbody></table>

[raghu]

I am not an iskconite. I am also not an Advaitin. However, I have studied Sanskrit, and I frankly don't see how this mantra is, as per sambya's words, "the most authentic description of advaita." Being able to put an Advaitic slant on the mantra does not make it an obviously Advaitic mantra. Actually, there is nothing in the mantra that is specific to Advaita, contrary to sambya's claims.

 

 

 

here i would beg to differ.as i have studied sanskrit i could clearly see the mistakes in translations.

 

the word 'purnam' means completely perfect or absolutewhole.but in this translation it is being interpreted as completely perfect,complete unit or complete balance.'purnam' has nothing to do with 'balance' or 'unit' .

 

the word om does not mean complete whole in this context.as this sloka is used as the mangalacharan in the begining of the book it is used as a auspicious symbol.just like most mantras start with an om.

 

most importantly nowhere there is a mention of 'personality of godhead'.

it says --- " purna adah " meaning 'that is complete whole'

" purna idam " meaning 'this is complete whole"

 

now this two words are are interpreted by most philosophies as under :

 

THAT --- god or ultimate truth or brahman

THIS --- the manifested cosmos.

 

where does the personality of god comes in .isnt this a shocking twist to the interpretations ?as my understanding of sanskrit might not be perfect one is free to get the texts interpreted by any learned proffessor of sanskrit and he would instantly see the results.

 

definitely i dont mean to say that god cannot be personal.he is personal , impersonal and also beyond those earthly concepts.

 

 

excellent said. but that would apply to impersonal god too. concepts like impersonallity and formlessness are real and true in this world.many objects in this earth are formless. so can god be short of a characteristics that even inanimate objects created by him has?

 

god is infinite.its wrong to limit god by drawing a line and proclaiming god can be only such and such and nothing more.he can much much beyond what we can comprehend.he is our lovable krishna,respected nrishimha and impersonal brahman all at the same time.if somebody asks 'how is all that possible at the same time?' then the answer would be--"that is why we call him god."

its for us to choose what aspect in him do we like the most and to follow accordingly and it is highly unwise to assume that everyone would have the same liking.

 

ALL GLORIES TO 'PURNAM'

[sambya]

sorry if i said anywhere that it is an absolute advaitic sloka. in fact every sloka has a lot of interpretations and all of them should be respected.but definitely this one do have very strong advaitic leanings.