PDA

View Full Version : who is lord krishna according to advaita theory ?



hinduism♥krishna
09 July 2013, 03:03 AM
Hari hari govinda.
Namaste advaitians.

I believe advaita is the most authentic dharma.Because it is purely based on vedas. I know lord krishna is the image, embodiment of parabramhan.

but From advaita pvf, i would like to know who is krishna?

What upanishadas say about lord krishna?

I hope someone intelligent advaitian will answer it according to upanishadas.

Hari govinda.

smaranam
09 July 2013, 04:06 AM
What upanishadas say about lord krishna?

I hope someone intelligent advaitian will answer it according to upanishadas.

Hari govinda.

Namaste,

I am not the Intelligent Advaitin you are looking for, but untill they come along,

What Upanishads say about Bramhan is all about KRshNa, because Shri KRshNa is Bramhan, but that is not COMPLETE info about KRshNa. Take it in conjunction with what KRshNa says about Himself in Bhagavad Gita and Shrimad BhAgavatam (not just Uddhav Gita, the whole thing - Canto 1,2,3 especially), and put two and two together.

Plus, in addition, I shall list the following Upanishad names so you can find them, read the sanskrit, read the translation and see for yourself:

1. GopAL TApani Upanishad
http://www.dharmakshetra.com/articles/gopal%20tapani%20meditation%20page%202.htm (http://www.dharmakshetra.com/articles/gopal%20tapani%20meditation%20page%202.htm)
Download Sanskrit-English http://vishnudut1926.blogspot.in/2013/06/gopala-tapani-upanishad-english.html#!/2013/06/gopala-tapani-upanishad-english.html (http://vishnudut1926.blogspot.in/2013/06/gopala-tapani-upanishad-english.html#!/2013/06/gopala-tapani-upanishad-english.html)) OR find your own copy

2. NArAyaNa Upanishad
3. Kali SantarNa Upanishad
4. MahA-NArAyaNa Upanishad
5. NRsiMha TApani Upanishad
6. Mandukya Upanishad starts with HARI IS AUM, which is everything there is...

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya


Hare RAm Hare RAm RAma RAma Hare Hare
Hare KRshNa Hare KRshNa KRshNa KRshNa Hare Hare

smaranam
09 July 2013, 05:10 AM
Atharva Veda (Gopala-tapani Upanishad 1.24)
yo brahmanam vidadhati purvam yo vai vedams ca gapayati sma krsnah:
"It was Krishna who in the beginning instructed Brahma in Vedic knowledge and who disseminated Vedic knowledge in the past

Narayana Upanishad (1)
"atha puruso ha vai narayano 'kamayata prajah srjeyeti:
'Then the Supreme Personality Narayana desired to create living entities.'

narayanad brahma jayate, narayanad prajapatih prajayate, narayanad indro jayate, narayanad astau vasavo jayante, narayanad ekadasa rudra jayante, narayanad dvadasadityah:
'From Narayana, Brahma is born, and from Narayana the patriarchs are also born. From Narayana, Indra is born, from Narayana the eight Vasus are born, from Narayana the eleven Rudras are born, from Narayana the twelve Adityas are born.'

Narayana Upanishad (4)
"brahmanyo devaki-putrah:
The son of Devaki, Krishna, is Bramhan.'
eko vai narayana asin na brahma na isano napo nagni-somau neme dyav-aprthivi na naksatrani na suryah
In the beginning of the creation there was only the Supreme Personality Narayana. There was no Brahma, no Ishan, no water, no fire, no moon, no heaven and earth, no stars in the sky, no sun.'

hinduism♥krishna
11 July 2013, 02:28 AM
Mandukya Upanishad starts with HARI IS AUM, which is everything there is...
Mandukya doesn't start with hari is om.
It starts with " All is aum and this atma is bramhan."

hari om krishna

smaranam
11 July 2013, 05:46 AM
Mandukya doesn't start with hari is om.

hari om krishna

You are right. It starts like this:

aum ity etad akṣaram idam sarvam, tasyopavyākhyānam
bhūtam bhavad bhaviṣyad iti sarvam auṁkāra eva
yac cānyat trikālātītaṁ tad apy auṁkāra eva.


1. OM! – This Imperishable Word is the whole of this visible universe. Its explanation is as follows: What has become, what is becoming, what will become, – verily, all of this is OM. And what is beyond these three states of the world of time, – that too, verily, is OM.


HOWEVER, out of their love for Hari OR their need to depend on Hari, many many like 'advaitayoga.org' have translated the first verse like this:

Harih Aum! AUM, the word, is all this, the whole universe. A clear explanation of it is as follows: All that is past, present and future is, indeed, AUM. And whatever else there is, beyond the threefold division of time—that also is truly AUM.

REF: http://www.advaitayoga.org/advaitayogaarticles/mandukya.html


These are followers of Shankara's Advaita saluting Hari! They see no difference between Hari and Aum when Aum (Shabda Bramhan) has actually emerged from Hari acc. to Hari Himself in the Bhagavad Gita.

I think www.krishna.com (http://www.krishna.com) did the same, like these common translations, and I picked that up from Krishna.com without checking the sanskrit. Sorry about that.

O Hari, chitta-hAri, karuNA-kAri, KRshNa MurAri! To me the MANDukya Upanishad is a manifestation of You Alone.

hinduism♥krishna
11 July 2013, 06:06 AM
yes, hari is om, om is bramhan and bramhan is atma(tattva).
All these is only bramhn or atma. These seperate individuality of jeevas are indeed false.Jivas are not real.Only atma or bramhan is the truth, eternal with infinite bliss. :D

hinduism♥krishna
11 July 2013, 07:11 AM
Namste,
plz dont post iskcons translation. Their translations are not authentic and accurate.They intentionally make changes in original verses and rewrite it af if verses support gaudiya philosophy :D

Gaudiya vaishnwas who say krishna is higher than bramhan are not liable to study upanishadas.Because upanishadas say there is nothing beyond bramhan.But iskcon are against upanishadas.It is out of vedic sanatana dharma.

He(atma) is the lord of all , omniscient, the controller and indweller of all ,the origin and dissolution of all beings and cause of all (mandukya 6)

In fact atma by itself is one undivided whole.But he appears as macrocosmic or microcosmic by producing the phenomina the time, space and causation within himself by his maya shakti.So differentiation in atma is only phenomenal and not real.

I dont consider om emerges from something.Because om is bramhan itself and it is the fourth state.

amatrash chaturtho. Avyavaharyah prapanchopashamah shivo. advaita
evam onkara atmaiva samvishaty Atmana.a.Atmanam ya evam veda ..
12..

That which has no parts ,incomprehensible (with the aid of sense organs), the cessation of all phenomena, all bliss and non-dual AUM, is the fourth and verily the same as Atman . He who knows this merges his self into the Cosmic Self. (He never again feels he is an individual self).



There are no more quarters. When you go beyond the three quarters, the three states of A, U, and M, then you reach chaturtha , the fourth one, turiya . This state is pure consciousness,beyond Isvara. The gross universe is then gone. The dream universe is gone. All universes, all diversities, all dualities, are gone. You are in the state of suddha chaitanya turiya and there is only your Self, Atman .


Hari krishna govinda

yajvan
11 July 2013, 11:56 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namast

If one were to study the chāndogya upanisad you will find a most interesting revelation in the 3rd chapter, 17th section , 6th śloka.

iti śivaṁ

Sudas Paijavana
11 July 2013, 03:48 PM
delete

hinduism♥krishna
25 July 2013, 10:03 AM
Hari om, Namaste.

I was expecting replies from advaitians. But sadly they are not active here.
This topic can become very interesting, krishna and bramhan :D

Bramhan takes saguna roop for his beloved devotees with the help of maya. Although bramhan is nirvikar and nirguna, he pleases the hearts of pure devotees by his atma-maya ( according to Bhagavad Gita) ,
He came in contact with maya yet he is unattached from maya and Controller of it.( also it is mysterious that krishna form is also eternal)
Krishna is poorna avatara of bramhan.
( I was expecting something like this)

Hari om govinda

the sadhu
02 November 2013, 03:42 PM
Hes the supreme "personality" of God.

God has no personality, because God is All personalities, God is Infinite so God cannot be limited to any limited quality of nature.

but out of all the billions of forms of the formless God, Krishna is often considered the best.

Krishna(as well as Shiva) are considered the perfect Jnani, the supremely enlightened being, fully aware of his or her divinity, who knows infinite spirit (shared by all beings)like mentioned in the isa upanishad, and knows their body as a small part of Nature.

i recall krishna saying
All beings are in me(spirit),but all beings are not in me(body).. this is my supreme mystery.


In Advaita, when the impersonal is given a personality, it becomes God(the deity).
Brahman + human Ego = God

thats why half-baked Jnanis(not enlightened) will go around saying im God! Im God! because they realized the singular divine essence of all creation but they still have a big ego, after months or years of meditation on the omnipresent spirit, the ego falls away and vanishes.
then the jnani is no longer "God", he becomes NO-thing(named or unnamed), then he is enlightened.

kallol
04 November 2013, 09:10 AM
Krishna is an avatar of Vishnu / Narayana. Krishna is suppposed to the most complete avatar.

If we say Krishna is all of Brahman then we and others are outside Brahman. If we say we and others are Brahman the Krishna is outside Brahman.

Or we can say Krishna was a person with multi person skill (superhuman) which cannot be surpassed. However superhuman he is - he had birth and death - as other humans. So as humans, we all belong to Brahman.

Now if we want to replace Vishnu / Narayana with Krishna - there might be a need to define Vishnu / Narayana.

However to alleviete of of these it would be interesting to understand the phenomenon of avatar. What is said


"yada yada hi dharmasya
glanir bhavati bharata
abhyutthanam adharmasya
tadatmanam srjamy aham



Praritranaya Sadhunam
Vinashaya Cha Dushkritam
Dharamasansthapnaya
Sambhavami Yuge-Yuge."

"Whenever there is decay
of righteousness O! Bharatha
And a rise of unrighteousness
then I manifest Myself!



For the protection of the good,
for the destruc­tion of the wicked and
for the establishment of righteousness,
I am born in every age."

Why and how does it happen ? Is there someone who is constantly watching and reacting or is it a rule based ?

If there is less bad people then there is no avatar, if the bad people are overwhelming then there is avatar. How does it happen ?

The answer lies in understanding the rebirth phenomenon. How and why rebirth happens ?

rama_t
06 November 2013, 05:25 PM
Can someone clarify the meanings of words
Narayana and Vishnu which represents Ultimate source of all life.

the sadhu
09 November 2013, 11:39 AM
Its a natural process of nature, when there is a degeneration of society and a corruption of he genuine teaching of dharma, the conditions become ripe to produce a revolutionary or a saint

These beings are recognized as avatars...

Just to seperate it from personal bias of readers; a good example is found in Shinto, were all beings are Kami(or Gods) but only dead people and nature spirits are called that because its an honorific term

The same goes with Brahman, every entity in existence is a Avatar of Brahman, but only the great teachers are bestowed the honorific title "Avatar"

Sriram257
11 November 2013, 04:15 PM
Narayana can interpreted in a number of ways "Nara" means the very goal of all Jivas and "Ayana" means the travel of those Jivas, So Narayana can mean the very attempt to get to the absolute or the attempt of the absolute to get to the Jivas if Saguna Brahman is accepted. The Puranas in general take Narayana to means one who is in water in the sense Narayana is suppose to be in the causal ocean of the whole creation , from this causal oceans many universes are suppose to be forms kind of like the multiverse theory.

Vishnu is interpreted as "Vyapnoti Vishwam Pravishati cha" That which is omnipresent and has entered into every thing. As per the Puranas when Brahma actually made the creation it was simply a shining egg, so Vishnu entered this egg and as a result this egg expanded into the existing universe. This is the Puranic version of the big bang theory. Hence he was called Vishnu

jopmala
13 November 2013, 08:06 PM
Namaste

If we respect the teachings of Srimad Bhagavad Gita , should we not recognize Krishna as ultimate destination which is regarded as brhman by jnani or bhagavan by bhakta or paramatma by yogi. Krishna has solved all disputes by saying that he is nirgun nirvishes nirakar as well as sagun savishes and sakar. jnani ,bhkata , yogi every one is dear to him. After going through Gita , can we think of any other entity beyond sri krishna who himself describes " nothing can excel me".

kallol
14 November 2013, 03:27 AM
Namaste

If we respect the teachings of Srimad Bhagavad Gita , should we not recognize Krishna as ultimate destination which is regarded as brhman by jnani or bhagavan by bhakta or paramatma by yogi. Krishna has solved all disputes by saying that he is nirgun nirvishes nirakar as well as sagun savishes and sakar. jnani ,bhkata , yogi every one is dear to him. After going through Gita , can we think of any other entity beyond sri krishna who himself describes " nothing can excel me".


There is no problem in recognizing the same, as long it rightly defines "me". However unfortunately most of Krishna bhaktas limit the "me" to the body of Krishna. The trouble begins there.

smaranam
14 November 2013, 04:25 AM
However unfortunately most of Krishna bhaktas limit the "me" to the body of Krishna. The trouble begins there.
namaste

That is your assumption about them :)



If we say Krishna is all of Brahman then we and others are outside Brahman. If we say we and others are Brahman the Krishna is outside Brahman.

This is not correct. Krishna IS all of Bramhan and we are His parts as individuals, and later either remain pure individuals in bhakti or attain His nature as Bramhan. Bramhan goes back to Bramhan.
However, acc. to advaita, we are the non-existent ones, we are the outsiders not Him. We don't exist, remember?


However superhuman he is - he had birth and death - as other humans. VaishNav scriptures like Shrimad BhAgavatam as well as KRshNa Himself in the Bhagvad Gita will tell you otherwise.

This thread (page 2 onwards) discusses appearance and disappearance of KrshNa but for those eyes who are not skeptical of the scripture itself : http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=7145&highlight=Krishna%27s+death

brahman
14 November 2013, 05:01 AM
Hari hari govinda.
Namaste advaitians.

I believe advaita is the most authentic dharma.Because it is purely based on vedas. I know lord krishna is the image, embodiment of parabramhan.

but From advaita pvf, i would like to know who is krishna?

What upanishadas say about lord krishna?

I hope someone intelligent advaitian will answer it according to upanishadas.

Hari govinda.





Dear HK et al.

It is in the semantic analysis of the word-content that the full certitude of vedāntism gains its full validity; and therefore ‘the word of the Guru’ is an inevitable counterpart involved in every knowledge situations in regard to Brahmavidyā (or the science of the Absolute).

Read More (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=110326&postcount=28)(This was posted earlier in another thread in reply to a different topic; but we think the same is again relevant here for a broader understanding of this topic.) Love:)

kallol
14 November 2013, 07:27 AM
namaste

That is your assumption about them :)



This is not correct. Krishna IS all of Bramhan and we are His parts as individuals, and later either remain pure individuals in bhakti or attain His nature as Bramhan. Bramhan goes back to Bramhan.
However, acc. to advaita, we are the non-existent ones, we are the outsiders not Him. We don't exist, remember?

VaishNav scriptures like Shrimad BhAgavatam as well as KRshNa Himself in the Bhagvad Gita will tell you otherwise.

This thread (page 2 onwards) discusses appearance and disappearance of KrshNa but for those eyes who are not skeptical of the scripture itself : http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=7145&highlight=Krishna%27s+death


Thanks Saranam for the clarification. Thw advaitins feel that all are part of brahman and perceives that in vaisnav way there is Krishna and ther are others.

Now if you say that Krishna is brahman and rest are part of it - then vaisnav way and advaita way are same - then why so much debates.

Again if you come back to bhagavatam which was meant for tuning the laymen's mind toward the ultimate truth then it is another instance that the moot point might have been missed.

Anyway more learning helps both.

smaranam
15 November 2013, 03:32 AM
Namaste Kallol

Now if you say that Krishna is brahman and rest are part of it - then vaisnav way and advaita way are same
Yes, they are the same. It is a matter of granularity, Beauty detail, that is either given importance, or not.


- then why so much debates.
I do not debate advaita :) So, cannot answer that.
Have only responded whenever someone said things like
-- worshipping God "images" is futile
-- bhakti is just emotional , for immature kids
-- puranas are fiction
-- KRshNa was just an intelligent human like everyone else
-- "If KRshNa NArAyaNa svayam comes in front of you, He should be ignored as made of mAyA and too much about name and form."

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

kallol
15 November 2013, 10:03 AM
I thought advaitins are more universal !!!!! More inclusive !!!!

May be what you have put are reactions to some comments. But who knows I might be wrong also.:)

jopmala
17 November 2013, 09:42 PM
Namaste


There is no problem in recognizing the same, as long it rightly defines "me". However unfortunately most of Krishna bhaktas limit the "me" to the body of Krishna. The trouble begins there.

‘ME’ is clearly defined in Bhagavad Gita. verse 18 of chapter XV states “ since I transcend the perishable and excel the imperishable, I am known in the Vedas and in this world as the purushottam”. Sri Krishna says in verse 8 of chap-IV in BG “ for protecting the virtuous for destroying the wicked and for setting righteousness on firm foundation, I am born and reborn from age to age” therefore it is understood that since he is born he must have a body but Krishna conceals his own nature by dint of yoga-maya and appears as a human being to the ignorant ( 25/VII). again verse 11 of chap IX says “ Fools not knowing My supreme nature as the Lord of creation, despise Me in My human form” bhakta never differentiates between body of Krishna and his name. Aishouriya and Madhuriya are two important aspects of bhagavan to bhakta who does not believe in nirvishesh nirakar nirvikar Brahman. Bhakta follows what Krishna advises in verses 2,3,4,5 and 6 of chap XII of BG. Bhakta never thinks himself as Brahman because bhakta believes in surrendering to bhagavan. if you allow( since it is advaita thread), I can quote from sri chaitanya charitamrita to present what is Krishna to bhakta.
Madhya lila 17 chapter of CC
“Nam vigraha swarup tin ekrupa
tine ved nahi tin chidananda swarupa
deha dehir nam namir krishne nahi ved
jiver dharma – nam deha swarup bived”
therefore bhakta does not differentiate Krishna nam Krishna deha or Krishna swarup
I think biased mindset is the only problem.

kallol
18 November 2013, 02:22 AM
It would be good if my previous posts are read to get the context right.

However one has the right be believe Purushottom in whatever form they want to.

grames
18 November 2013, 01:33 PM
Krshna is rich! Due to the love of Krshna, the jiva is given the share of rich he/she can hold! So, the jiva has given the "nature" of Brahman! - One way of understanding.

In the Prema, Brahman gives complete knowledge of everything but to the capacity of the jiva - Dharmabhuta Jnana giving same idea of "Nature" of Brahman.

NOWHERE the individual identity is lost - getting the DharmaBhuta Jnana does not mean, the body of Jiva is made of that Jnana - more technically the individuality of the jiva can also get the share of Nature or Guna of Brahman but Brahman alone qualified to be Poorna or in Full! But, jiva is full by the limited capacity in comparison to the Brahman who is Unlimited, it is also full! This is the Samanam which simply means "Equivalent" or what is "enjoyed", "Expressed" and "Experienced" in that communion with Brahman is "Equal" but limited by the limits of the Jiva! The subject jiva is never lost or merge in to Supreme Subject by loss.

This is the difference! But, not sure if it is easy to understand so why so many debates!

the sadhu
19 November 2013, 03:11 PM
There are a lot of misconceptions about jnana, Bhakti is fundamental, but advaita people worship life as Brahmans manifestation. Most jnanis do not believe in a supernatural. Person in the sky. But worship all beings as the qualities of one non-dual God.

Unfortunately many people cannot seperate attachment to an image, with love of God.

harih
20 November 2013, 01:11 AM
Namaste thread opener͵

Interesting Question. As for intelligent Advaitins͵ who better than Adi Sankaracharya who spread Advaita into every nook and corner of Bharata?

Paramahamsa Parivraajaka Adi Shankaracharya has written an excellent prologue to his Bhagavad Gita Bhaashya in which HE has clearly illuminated the Advaitic view on Bhagavan Krishna.

I dont have the text with me now; it wont be doing justice to the Acharya if I simply write whatever comes to my memory.

So why dont you procure a copy of the Bhagavad Gita Bhaashya͵ which is easily available͵ with as well as without translation?