Brahm has a Form and it CANNOT be understood by you.

[ranjeetmore]

"Na tatra chakshur gacchhati na bha gacchhati no manah." -1.3 Kenopanishad

 

 

 

Your senses,your mind and your intelligence CANNOT go there.They Can NEVER know Brahm.They are material/jada/prakrt/mayic.

 

 

The following mantras are found in the Kenopanishad:

 

"Yad vacha nav vyudatitam yena vag vyudate tad eva brahm tvam viddinedam yadytam upasate" - 1.4

 

"jana mana san manute yena hurmano matam tad eva brahm viddinedam yadytam upasate" - 1.5

 

"ya chakshu cana pashyate yena chakshu 'vam pashyati tad eva brahm tvam viddi " - 1.6

 

"ya kshotrena na ksrunoti he na kshotra midam ksrutam tad eva brahm tvam viddi nedam yadytam upasate" - 1.7

 

"yah pranena na praaneti he na praanah praneeyate tad eva brahm tvam viddi nedam yadytam upasate" - 1.8

 

These verses mean :

Bhagavan PROVIDES the Energies in your senses,your Mind and your Intelligence.

With THAT energy do all these faculties perform work.Without His energy,they are INCAPABLE to perform their respective work.

 

NOW,the import is :

 

Bhagavan/His energies are the ones that put life into your senses/mind and intelligence,

exactly how the Sun powers up the solar light.

With that solar energy,the solar lights work.

 

Lets say the solar light is a torch (our senses/mind/intelligence) powered by the Sun (Bhagavan).

 

NOW TELL ME,

CAN YOUR TORCH LIGHT THROW LIGHT ON THE SUN ?

 

 

 

 

I'll answer that for you - NO,The torch light is incapable of throwing light on the Sun.

 

So How do you propose that we will understand Bhagavan/His Form/His names/His Being with our pathetic intelligence?

 

It CANNOT THROW LIGHT ON BHAGAVAN.Period.

 

for Bhagavan Himself is the cause for making your Senses/Intelligence work.

 

"Prakashak se prakashit vastu apne prakashak ki prakashika NAHI BAN SAKTI. " - Sri Maharaj ji.

 

 

This is exactly what happens in the incident narrated in the Kenopanishad.

All the great demigods like Indra,Agni are UNABLE to even Pierce the Transcendental Fiery,Effulgent Form of Sri Krsna.

They're unable to even look upon Him.

 

"Yadi manyate tu vedeti"- 2.1 Kenopanishad.

 

If you think that you know/can know/will know Brahm,then there is not a bigger fool than you.

e.g. Kalidas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Yato vacho ni vartante apraapya mana sasaha" taitereya upanishad 2.4/ also found in the same upanishad 2.9.

 

Your senses and Mind and Intelligence Cannot GO there.They CaN NEVER grasp even a hair of Brahm.APRAAPYA. He is Unfathomable.Any and Every Part of Him is Unfathomable.

Even a small part of Him or any Aspect of Him is incomprehensible.

 

Why ?

 

Purnasya purna medaya...

 

He is the Ultimate whole.

 

 

"Tadah avyakta maha" - Vedanta Sutra 3.2.22

 

He is Avyakta....Beyond Everything.

 

 

"Ram Swarupa Tumhara

Vachan Agochar Buddhi PARA !"

 

Sri Tulsidasa says,"That Brahm is Rama Swarup.He is BEYOND the grasp of your intelligence."

 

"Avigat akath apaar

Ram atarkya buddhi man vaani

mat hamar asa sun hu sayaani

go gochar jaha lagi man jaayi

so sab maaya janhu bhai."

 

Tarkya- means logic.Tulsidas says,"Don't take your logic there ! Ramacandra is BEYOND your intelligence,mind and speech . Those who are Intelligent Will heed to this advice of mine.Why cannot you understand Him by reasoning ?

I'll tell you why.Wherever your Mind,intelligence and senses go,it is LIMITED only to Mayic region.It CANNOT go Beyond Maya."

 

Thus Sri Tulsidas explains in such simple language so as to let even the fool understand the vedas.

 

Okay.We cannot know Him.But what about the great intellectuals ?

Brahma,Saraswati,Brhaspati ?

 

"Jag pe khan sab dekhan haare

vidhi hari shambhu nachavan haare

Teu na jaanahi Maram Tumhara

aur tumhi ko jaanan haara."

 

Rama ! Brahma,Vishnu and Mahesvara Do not Know You ! Who else will then Know you !?

 

"VedaAham samatitani vartamanani caarjuna

bhavishyani ca bhutani Mam TU VEDA NA KASHCHANN" - Bhagavad Gita 7.26

 

"Arjuna , I know Everyone BUT NO ONE can know Me.NO ONE."

 

Why ?

 

"Trbhir guna mayayair bhavair ebhih sarvam idam jagat

Mohitam nabhijanati mam ebhyah param Avyayam." Bhagavd Gita 7.13

 

No ONE can know Me,Because they are ALL under the three Modes of My Maya.I'm beyond these three Modes,divya.

 

 

 

So the conclusion is : No one can know Bhagavan.No one.No one.No one.

 

So no use putting forward some logical questions about the nature/aspect/form of Brahm.

Thus it is understood that the questions you put forward are to be considered futile.(No offense to YOU.)

[Beggar]

 

So the conclusion is : No one can know Bhagavan.No one.No one.No one.

 

 

Onetime one gentleman explained a similar conception to Srila Sridhar Mararaja, saying, "We are the finite and then there is the infinite. If the infinite is truly infinite then it cannot be known to the finite. Srila Sridhar Maharaja then replied, The Infinite is not Infinite if He cannot make Himself known to the finite."

[kaisersose]

Thank you for your time. Just to be clear, I am not trying to prove anything; I do not have an alternate theory to replace yours. I am just questioning this line of thinking as I am not seeing a complete and consistent picture.

 

Your senses,your mind and your intelligence CANNOT go there.They Can NEVER know Brahm.They are material/jada/prakrt/mayic.

This is much better. Now by your own admission, Bhagavan is beyond the mind and the intellect. How does the concept of a form attributed to Bhagavan make sense then for you to post on a discussion forum? As the discussion is within the scope of the mind?

Here is the definition of form from standard dictionaries.

1. external appearance of a clearly defined area, as distinguished from color or material; configuration: a triangular form.

2. the shape of a thing or person.

3. a body, esp. that of a human being.

4. a dummy having the same measurements as a human body, used for fitting or displaying clothing: a dressmaker's form.

5. something that gives or determines shape; a mold.

6. a particular condition, character, or mode in which something appears: water in the form of ice.

7. the manner or style of arranging and coordinating parts for a pleasing or effective result, as in literary or musical composition: a unique form for the novel.

As you can see, all these definitions make it clear that the concept of a form lies within the scope of the mind and the intellect. So how does your logic flow then?

I am not saying Bhagavan is formless, but how can you say Bhagavan has a form, especially in line with your above admission that Bhagavan is beyond the mind and the concept of forms is within the mind?

So the conclusion is : No one can know Bhagavan.No one.No one.No one.

So no use putting forward some logical questions about the nature/aspect/form of Brahm.

Thus it is understood that the questions you put forward are to be considered futile.(No offense to YOU.)

If I had not put forth these "logical" questions, it would never have occurred to you to bring out these arguments. So in my opinion, my questions are not futile. They are addressing a very key concept.

Cheers

[bhaktajan]

1] Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by ranjeetmore

Your senses,your mind and your intelligence CANNOT go there.They Can NEVER know Brahm.They are material/jada/prakrt/mayic.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

2] This is much better. Now by your own admission, Bhagavan is beyond the mind and the intellect. How does the concept of a form attributed to Bhagavan make sense then for you to post on a discussion forum? As the discussion is within the scope of the mind?

 

<AT i < parampara? a called succession of chain from received is ?Knowledge think, to prompted was I --BUT, keiserose with aggreed point this>

<Keiserose seemingly accepts that knowledge is bestowed by a higher authority

<I>& 'bonefide knowledge is affirmed by guru+sadhu+sastra'

& 'one's degree of faith, karma and desires' define one's "chances" to "know-in-full" the complete picture --ie: having a mother who undoubtedly reveals absolute truths since youth (vs brainwashing or doltishness).

 

and THEN, continues by quoting a sastra: >

 

Here is the definition of form from standard dictionaries.

 

<IS is ....is is how all knowledge has come to educate us. Otherwise we'd be savages in the jungle></I>

[bija]

 

What is the Cosmic Organism up to (of which we are a part)? If we hold to the hope of a cosmic evolution, then the future really does look good. Sages throughout the ages have glimpsed our potential. Some even glorified the concept of 'personality' to a high degree. Could it be that we really are One? And that, it is not an impersonal affair? Instead living, breathing, growing together?

 

In time each part of the whole may arise to a new vision. Fully integrated and definately inter-connected! All things are inter-connected! We can see it?

 

The vision of a Cosmic Christ, or, Krsna consciousness and Goloka as the destiny? These possibilities await us (unlimited potential and variety)! Live it! Breathe it! We are One! It is diverse! It is yours to choose - make it!

 

'persons are individuals who transcend their merely organic individuality in conscious participation'.

 

Come along now - all these wars and violence, separated sectarian affairs - is not it! The Truth is it...And the Truth is ever-new, and always moving forward...

 

It is our destiny. We are One Person! We are parts that love It! We are conscious...

 

 

So How do you propose that we will understand Bhagavan/His Form/His names/His Being with our pathetic intelligence? posted by ranjeet

We will 'all' have to wait and see Ranjeet.

 

Great opening post, thank you Ranjeet!

 

 

If I had not put forth these "logical" questions, it would never have occurred to you to bring out these arguments. So in my opinion, my questions are not futile. They are addressing a very key concept. by kaisersose

Definately.

 

 

I am not saying Bhagavan is formless, but how can you say Bhagavan has a form, especially in line with your above admission that Bhagavan is beyond the mind and the concept of forms is within the mind? by kaisersose

 

 

Onetime one gentleman explained a similar conception to Srila Sridhar Mararaja, saying, "We are the finite and then there is the infinite. If the infinite is truly infinite then it cannot be known to the finite. Srila Sridhar Maharaja then replied, The Infinite is not Infinite if He cannot make Himself known to the finite." by beggar

[raghu]

 

 

So the conclusion is : No one can know Bhagavan.No one.No one.No one.

 

So no use putting forward some logical questions about the nature/aspect/form of Brahm.

Thus it is understood that the questions you put forward are to be considered futile.(No offense to YOU.)

 

If no one can know Brahman then this means that any study of scripture is futile. So why all these Vedas?

 

The correct position is that no one can *completely* understand Brahman. The concept simply will not fit in one's head as He is beyond the ability of a finite mind to grasp. But, one can certainly *begin* to understand Him by careful study of the shruti under the guidance of a proper guru.

[ranjeetmore]

Continuing from previous post,

Who can Know Bhagavan ?

 

The simple answer is: Bhagavan.

 

So He can give this Knowledge to others ?

Yes.

 

Brhatvat Brinhadhatvat ca. - sruti.

 

Brahm means One who is the Greatest and Who makes others also Great.

 

 

 

***

 

"Ano raniyan mahato mahiyan atma guhayam mihitosyajantotamah

kratuh pasyati bhisa shoko dhatuh prasadan mahiman misam"

 

-Svetasvatara upanishad 3.20

-Kathopanishad 1.2.20

 

DHATUH PRASADAN MAHIMAN MISAM- With His Krpa(The word Prasada has been used).With His Mercy,ANYONE can know Him.Otherwise it is not possible.

Anyone ?

Yes even cats,dogs,donkeys.Even an Elephant came to the knowledge of that Brahm.

 

***

 

Why is veda contradicting itself? It IS NOT.The vedas say NO ONE CAN KNOW BRAHM ON THEIR OWN STRENGTH.And now,

 

 

"Nayamatma pravachanena labhya na medhaya na bahuna shrutena yah me vai sh bhrinute...... "

- Kathopanishad 1.2.23

- Mundakopanishad 3.2.3

 

You cannot Know that Brahm by listening to lectures (Pravachan),

 

Na medhaya- The greatest of all intellectuals cannot grasp Him.

 

Na bahuna shrutena- You may listen to the vedas thousands of times but you will never attain Him.

 

So How ?

 

Yah me vai sh Bhrnute- Those who recieve His mercy can ALONE Know Him.

 

***

 

"Deva prasadat ca" - Svetasvatara Upanishad 6.21

 

His krpa/Mercy/prasada is a must.Otherwise forget it.

 

"Atha api te deva padambuja dvaya prasada lesa nugrihit eva hijanati

tattvam bhagavann mahimno na chanya eko viciram vichinman."- Srimad Bhagvatam 10.14.29

 

Srila Vedavyasa states that even if someone does any type of sadhana/penance/yoga/etc for crores of Kalpas(1 kalpa=511 trillion years ?),it doesn't matter.You won't be able to catch a hair of Bhagavan.

 

Then how ?

If He bestows some mercy (krpa kataksh/prasada lesa).Only a little mercy,that's it.

 

***

Arjuna said,"Nasto Mohah smritir labdha tvat prasadan mayacyutasthito 'smi gata sandehah karisye vacanam tava."

 

-Bhagavad Gita 18.73

 

Krsna ! By YOUR MERCY I am no longer under illusion.BY YOUR MERCY.Tvat prasadan.

 

***

 

"Ram Krpa binu sunu khag rayi

jaani na jaayi Ram Prabhu taayi

Jaane bina na hoye para teeti

Binu Para teeti na hoyi hi preeti

Tumhari krpa tum hi Raghu nandan

Jaanat bhagat bhagat urchandan

Ram Krpa Nasha Hi sab rogah." - Sri Tulsidas.

 

His Krpa ALONE.You cannot Know Him at all without His Mercy."

 

So daasi Raghuveer ki

Samujhe Mithya sopy

chutaye na Ram Kripa binu

naath kahu pada roopy."

 

This Maya is the servant of Sri Rama.I declare that without Ram Kripa This Maya will not Go.

 

 

There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that Brahm can be known without His mercy.

 

Problem solved.

 

Find a person who has recieved Bhagavan's Mercy and ask him,"What is the form of Brahm ?"

 

He will then tell you.

[ranjeetmore]

OR

 

We could have taken the easier way and just accepted Srimad Bhagvatam.But apparently,it is not much of an authority in Mayavaad circles.

 

I'm not mocking or anything......

[ranjeetmore]

 

 

This is much better. Now by your own admission, Bhagavan is beyond the mind and the intellect. How does the concept of a form attributed to Bhagavan make sense then for you to post on a discussion forum? As the discussion is within the scope of the mind?

Here is the definition of form from standard dictionaries.

1. external appearance of a clearly defined area, as distinguished from color or material; configuration: a triangular form.

2. the shape of a thing or person.

3. a body, esp. that of a human being.

4. a dummy having the same measurements as a human body, used for fitting or displaying clothing: a dressmaker's form.

5. something that gives or determines shape; a mold.

6. a particular condition, character, or mode in which something appears: water in the form of ice.

7. the manner or style of arranging and coordinating parts for a pleasing or effective result, as in literary or musical composition: a unique form for the novel.

As you can see, all these definitions make it clear that the concept of a form lies within the scope of the mind and the intellect. So how does your logic flow then?

Going by the above logic,

'Formlessness' and or/ 'nothingness',this concept also exists within the mind.Am i right ?

So if you say that the concept of Form exists within the mind and hence this concept cannot apply in Brahm's region,then you will also have to say that VOID-this concept is inapplicable also by the same logic.

 

Then there is another problem.

The vedas say He GIVES the energies with which the senses are able to TAKE IN the knowledge of matter.

Now lets say,Eyes can see forms of matter.

BUT it is Bhagavan who makes it possible for your eyes to see,your intelligence to understand it and your mind to think about it.

On the other hand,the vedas say that EVERYTHING has Emanated From that Supreme Person,manifest(form) and unmanifest(formlessness).

 

It is because of His energy that we are seeing,thinking and understanding form.Because of His energies,your mind can think about that form.How is it logical to conclude that FORM/FORMLESSNESS originates in the Mind ??

It does not originate in the mind.We merely observe it.

 

It exists outside of the mind,as a transformation of one of Bhagavan's energies.Form being a transformation of His own energy,obviously implies that FORM/FORMLESSNESS found in our present surroundings itself originates from Bhagavan.Thus you cannot apply a definition from a dictionary.

[ranjeetmore]

Post #9 has absolutely no value for it is my speculation and i can't even delete it .

Dunno what i was thinking.

 

Please read post #7 which continues from post #1.

[kaisersose]

 

Post #9 has absolutely no value for it is my speculation and i can't even delete it .

Dunno what i was thinking.

 

Please read post #7 which continues from post #1.

 

On the start of this thread, you said Brahman is beyond mind and intellect. This means all his attributes are also beyond what we can comprehend, in which case we can neither say he has a form or that he is formless. Then you said ask an enlightened person and he will tell you. You should know by now, that different "enlightened" people say different things, though that is irrelevant for now. Then you said, accepting the Bhagavatam as an authority solves the problem.

 

I don't get it.

 

If it is beyond my mind and intellect, neither the enlightened soul nor the Bhagavatam can tell me if Brahman has a form and if yes, what that form is. Or even that Brahman is formless.

 

Can you answer clearly and succinctly without a barrage of quotes that do not really address the question? Do you know what Brahman's form is? If not, why? How do you know he has a form at all? And is it a form that we can comprehend with our minds or not? If not, then the question pops up again - why are we calling it a form?

 

Thanks

[ranjeetmore]

The position of brahm is clear.

He has a form because the vedas say so.

That form cannot be speculated on and or thought about because the vedas say so.

 

So what is the problem ?????

 

Your asking me,do you know what is Brahm's form .

I do.I know so from those 6 personalities whom i mentioned earler and revealed scriptures.

 

How do i know He has a form at all ?

Dve vava brahmano rupe murtancaivamurtanca,

Brahm is Formless as well as with a form.

 

Nara kritm para brahm.

 

The form cannot be speculated upon.I cannot formulate the form of brahm according to my whims.

But Acharyas have accepted that the mind being material,the Remembrance of the Lord is material,as also the meditation on nirguna,nirvishesha,niraakar brahm is material.

But in the case of Bhagavan,He goes on bestowing His mercy,just as the sadhaka progresses.This is possible because Sri Bhagavan manifests all the energies.

Whereas niraakar Brahm is inactive.Thus there is no 'bestowing of mercy' on mayavaadis.

Thus if brahm's form is explained to you,you will be able to meditate upon It.But,inevitably,it will be such a form as springs from your limited,material mind.

ONLY after you attain Brahm will you be able to see the Real,eternal form.

The one that Shankara,Narada,Vyasa,Bhisma,etc. see.

 

Otherwise,

Tulsidas says,"During the Svayamvara,when Sri rama was present in the arena,all the people who were assembled there saw Him differently.One said He has 10 heads,the other said He has 20 heads.Still others said He has 100 heads.No one could see Him AS HE IS."

 

Even Sri Krsna...You'll just see a normal boy,who is blackish and quite beautiful.If you see Him in Vrndavan,you will laugh on the Vaishnavacharyas.You will only laugh that Para Brahm is teasing and chasing girls like a normal,lust driven boy.

 

Thats because your eyes CAN NEVER transcend the Maya...Bhagavan's body is covered by yogamaya.

This energy maintains its work of yoga at the same time,doing the work of 'maya' in front of conditioned people.

This is why you can never identify Bhagavan even if He comes to eat at your house.

Thus there is no question of thinking about the original form,when you cannot even see it in the original splendour and opulence.

 

If we cannot comprehend the Form,the question pops up,why we call it a form ???

How ?

The fact that YOU CANNOT COMPREHEND THE FORM FROM BASICS should give you the hint to actually stop using your intellect.

But no.Still,a 'question pops up...'

 

thanks.

[rahulhb]

Beyond Brahman - is Krishna , Ram.

 

Brahman is just the rays of the body.

[sambya]

 

Beyond Brahman - is Krishna , Ram.

 

Brahman is just the rays of the body.

 

apart from brahma samhita and other similar vaishnav texts which other scripture dealing with nature of brahman says as such ??

[srikanthdk71]

And....well the arguement still continues....!!! Form and formless, Brahman and Krishnan, Buddhu and Buddhimaan.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

apart from brahma samhita and other similar vaishnav texts which other scripture dealing with nature of brahman says as such ??

 

No study of Vedānta is considered complete without a close examination of the Prasthāna Traya, the texts that stand as the three starting points.

 

So, we cannot just say "is it in Vedanta Sutras".

 

There is sruti, smrti and nyaya.

 

The Brahma sūtras, also known as Vedānta Sūtras, constitute the Nyāya prasthāna, the logical starting point of the Vedānta philosophy (Nyāya = logic/order). No study of Vedānta is considered complete without a close examination of the Prasthāna Traya, the texts that stand as the three starting points. The Brahma Sutras are attributed to Badarayana.

 

While the Upanishads (Śruti prasthāna, the starting point of revelation) and the Bhagavad-Gītā (Smriti prasthāna, the starting point of remembered tradition) are the basic source texts of Vedānta, it is in the Brahma sūtras that the teachings of Vedānta are set forth in a systematic and logical order.

[primate]

 

Beyond Brahman - is Krishna , Ram.

 

Brahman is just the rays of the body.

"The word 'Brahman' indicates the complete Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is Sri Krishna. That is the verdict of all Vedic literature." (Caitanya-caritamrita Madhya-lila, 6.147)

 

Vishnu or Bhagavan Sri Krishna is the supreme personal spirit soul. Brahman is His impersonal energy pervading the entire universe. If Brahman is the body of the universe, then Krishna is the mind and soul of the universe. Human personal spirit souls are simultaneously one with Brahman and different from Krishna. Personality implies individuality and difference. Impersonality implies oneness. Since nothing can be any simpler than 'one', impersonal Brahman must be original. If personal Krishna is the ultimate origin, then Krishna and Brahman must be one and the same God, being both personal and impersonal. Oneness (advaita/monism) must be true, because logically there can be only one origin. But the absolute Truth may be a person that has a transcendental form..