Brahman to ISKCON?

[Tirisilex]

What is Brahman to ISKCON? How is it defined? Is it different to other Hindu "sects"? If so how?

[smaranam]

Namaste



BrahmaN to ISKCON is the same as BrahmaN to all Gaudiya VaishNavs , to the entire umbrella of VaishNavs, and to all followers of the Ved - Sanatan Dharma.

Particularly, Shrimad BhAgvatam, prime scripture, tells us that the Supreme can be viewed on three levels or in three ways:

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 1.2.11

vadanti tat tattva-vidas

tattvaḿ yaj jñānam advayam

brahmeti paramātmeti

bhagavān iti śabdyate

Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān.

PURPORT by A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami PrabhupAd

The Absolute Truth is both subject and object, and there is no qualitative difference there. Therefore, Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān are qualitatively one and the same. The same substance is realized as impersonal Brahman by the students of the Upaniṣads, as localized Paramātmā by the Hiraṇyagarbhas or the yogīs, and as Bhagavān by the devotees. In other words, Bhagavān, or the Personality of Godhead, is the last word of the Absolute Truth. Paramātmā is the partial representation of the Personality of Godhead, and impersonal Brahman is the glowing effulgence of the Personality of Godhead, as the sun rays are to the sun-god.
....
...
As it is explained in the first śloka of the First Chapter of the Bhāgavatam, the Supreme Truth is self-sufficient, cognizant and free from the illusion of relativity. In the relative world the knower is different from the known, but in the Absolute Truth both the knower and the known are one and the same thing. In the relative world the knower is the living spirit or superior energy, whereas the known is inert matter or inferior energy. Therefore, there is a duality of inferior and superior energy, whereas in the absolute realm both the knower and the known are of the same superior energy. There are three kinds of energies of the supreme energetic. There is no difference between the energy and energetic, but there is a difference of quality of energies. The absolute realm and the living entities are of the same superior energy, but the material world is inferior energy. The living being in contact with the inferior energy is illusioned, thinking he belongs to the inferior energy. Therefore there is the sense of relativity in the material world. In the Absolute there is no such sense of difference between the knower and the known, and therefore everything there is absolute.

----

Ishwar parama krushNa
saccidAnanda vigraha
anAdirAdir govindam
sarva kAraNa kAraNam

- Shri Shri Brahma Samhita 5.1 - by Lord BrahmA.

SYNONYMS

īśvaraḥ — the controller; paramaḥ — supreme; kṛṣṇaḥ — Lord Kṛṣṇa; sat — comprising eternal existence; cit — absolute knowledge; ānanda — and absolute bliss; vigrahaḥ — whose form; anādiḥ — without beginning; ādiḥ — the origin; govindaḥ — Lord Govinda; sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam — the cause of all causes.

TRANSLATION

Kṛṣṇa who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes.


Govindam AdiPurusham Tam aham bhajAmi ~

praNAm

[anirvan]

Namast

[QUOTE][COLOR="Navy"]The Absolute Truth is both subject and object, and there is no qualitative difference there. Therefore, Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān are qualitatively one and the same. The same substance is realized as impersonal Brahman by the students of the Upaniṣads, as localized Paramātmā by the Hiraṇyagarbhas or the yogīs, and as Bhagavān by the devotees.

Excellent post smaranam ji,my sata pranam,

what you said is absolutely the gist of Guadiya vaishnav,and its the truth realized by true acharyas who have see the absolute truth in all forms(purna jnani premika siromanis).

But ISKON,i dont think they view in this way.they tend to say Brahman is qualitatively inferior as if sunrays is lower that sun.and mayawadis go into brahman with lower level of bliss ,if at all:)

knowing brahman is like becoming sweet,but knowing bhagban is like eating sweets.:rolleyes:

i need your opinion.

[Adhvagat]

From what I've seen from ISKCON gurus, they don't say it's inferior, perhaps not directly, but they definitely state that if Krishna is the source of these emanation, why not worship Krishna directly?

[anirvan]

From what I've seen from ISKCON gurus, they don't say it's inferior, perhaps not directly, but they definitely state that if Krishna is the source of these emanation, why not worship Krishna directly?

They want to say that Personal form is first and brahman(sunrays) part is second.so 1st is origin of second. which is completely wrong and against the very ethos of advita.

Its like butter in milk. Brahman is the milk. Butter is Bhagaban(whichever name you may call him like krishna/Ram/Siva).

So in Brahmananda anubhuti,one experience both componenets......the all pervading akhana-sachidananda tattva plus Bhagaban tattva ,but not like personal bhagaban of bhaktas. so they taste butter,but mixed with milk.

But a bhakta who enter LEELA ,serve and experience Personal Bhagaban,its more pure,more loving and more rasa-yukta.so its like tasting butter directly.
but Bhakta of such qualities definitely also miss the other parts of milk.so they miss swaroop-ananda and they can"t be as liberal and broad as advitin.

this is the reason,pure bhakti-margi appears fundamentalist,but it shows their un-diluted love for divine only.so we can view this as positive things.:)

This is the difference between Nitya and leela.

[smaranam]

Hare KrushNa
Shat praNAm

What is my opinion ? No opinion. I just live with MohanA. I don't know what you say. Sometimes i am 9, sometimes 12, sometimes 14 like Lukmini, sometimes oldel but light now i am 5. So how can i undelstand all these big big worlds ? See when i was youngle i said "LAdhe" , She says, now you can plonounce the "R", why say "Ladhe", but i just like to continue saying Ladhe. Then all the sakhis think i am so cute and they blaid my hail and LAdhe gives mewa mithayi tho eat. But i don't let anyone else blaid my hail only MohanA ol Ladhe. That's it. But mostly i play with MohanA.

------

BhagvAn being superior to BrahmaN has to be understood in the right light. If butter gives more delight, it is superior. I'll give you homogenized full-fat milk to drink. It tastes like whole-milk, not like butter. How can you taste butter ?

DnyAneshwar Maharaj says churn the milk and get the butter, but not keval advaita - it also denies the other nutrients, calcium and fat in milk as saguN, so only water remains. Also, who is going to hold the ravi to churn the milk and who is around to "see" the butter, skim it, (no hands), eat it ? Finally, who is there to share the butter (the joy of sharing) ?
This means, the ultimate cannot be the milk - or worse, the water. There has to be someone in charge. Kevala followers say that go into turya and come back out - then share material butter with all. However, there is turyAteeta - BhagvAn and His entourage - welcome to the spiritual world.

I love reading your posts, AnirvanJi, however, AnadiJi is right, you are portraying the advaita as explained in vedas - Satyam jn~Anam anantam VishNum anAkasham paramAkAsham... , not keval advaita as it is taught. Any modern-day keval advaita follower will tell you it is taboo to have "another pair of eyes to look into". Neither are you allowed to exist nor is BhagvAn. I did not know this myself ( i thought advaita means love all as oneself ), and was horrified to discover this - so i asked KrushNA MadhusudanA - please let us get off this Advaita cruise ship. He was so kind to take me on that curiosity-cruise in the first place. I am not exactly dying to meet Rangadevi, Tungavidya, Jatila or Mukhara, but wiping out everything is too much.

----

Similar thinking in how KrushNA > VishNu to the Gaudiyas. It means this:

KrushNa == VishNu in tattva
KrushNa > VishNu in ras, mAdhurya - acc. to Lord Chaitanya

Hey, but i love my Lord as Chaturbhuj NAlAyaN, He is so madhul and calm and gentle.

Hale Klishnaaaa

[anirvan]

Hare KrushNa
Shat praNAm

[QUOTE]I love reading your posts, AnirvanJi, however, AnadiJi is right,

I know too he is right.i am just trying to expel his misunderstanding about advita and trying to bring connection and compatibility between both apparent philosophy.

But meanwhile if aim for only butter,you are missing calcium,fats,proteins of the milk.this is exactly happens in kebala bhakti without jnana.the very self...swaroopananda is missed. you can"t be BISWA-PRANA.in my Gurudev"s words, becoming sweet and distributing one among infinite lives is the greatest
virtue a brahma-vid experiences. he simultaneously enjoys through infinite lives of the creation by becoming their heart and souls. this is the MAHANATA AND BISWA-PRANATA OF brahma-vid. if one compare with raganuga margi,later appears so selfish and narrow minded.they can"t undrestand what is biswa-prana and can never be a true servant of mankind.

but definitely brahma-vid misses butter.but question of sharing? they share the joy and pain of infinite creations,its lives for infinite period ,not by hearing or talking but by sitting on their hearts.

Is it not possible to drink water and also butter separately same time??? i always wanted both since my spiritual quest as i always wanted best ,and to me the best is tasting BOTH. this what my gurudev has attained and also asked humans to know the both truth of brahman,then only you can be complete.

and his teaching is-----Path of Gauranga,jnana of Shankara. with bhakti marga ,you can become combined Idol of Shankara-Gauranga.

jayaguru

[anirvan]

Hare KrushNa

------


[QUOTE]Any modern-day keval advaita follower will tell you it is taboo to have "another pair of eyes to look into". Neither are you allowed to exist nor is BhagvAn. I did not know this myself

Kindly clarify it,as i couldn"t understand it.


I am not exactly dying to meet Rangadevi, Tungavidya, Jatila or Mukhara, but wiping out everything is too much.


Too cute :)

Mujhe bhi buttel khani hai,mujhe bhi mohana ke sath khelni hai,cilket.,chol-poolish,makhan chol ko pakelke Yashomati maiyaa ke pas le jani he...:)

Ladhe Ladhe

[smaranam]

Hare KrushNa



But meanwhile if aim for only butter,you are missing calcium,fats,proteins of the milk.this is exactly happens in kebala bhakti without jnana.the very self...swaroopananda is missed.

I look at this differently.

Actually, butter to milk is not the right anology. KrushNA IS in fact the source. In fact, if at all we want to look at it from jn~Ana POV, ghee is better - ghee is the Ultimate ESSENCE - it cannot get any purer. So KrushNa is the ghee, ESSENCE , ParamAtmA that pervades all. "GHEE - the highest sattva, is all-pervading in milk" (quote - NarayaN Maharaj) , and milk is the all-pervading BrahmaN.

So you see, impersonal brahman pervades all but Shri KrushNa ParamAtmA - the GHEE, is the ESSENCE of and origin of that brahmaN at the same time all-pervading that brahmaN' (now please let us not get into dairy process details :) because material process is the inverse upside down reflection of the spirtual)

sarvam idam khalvidam bramhaN'
and... the GHEE, the ESSENCE, the basis, the pratishthA of THAT bramhaN' is paramAtmA - Shri KrushNa.

bhahmANo hi pratishthA aham amrutasyAvyayasya cha
shAshvatasya cha dharmasya sukhasyaikAntikasya cha - BG 14.27

Verily I am the original foundation (prathishthhA) of the Ultimate Truth/ brahmaN and of eternal righteousness; of imperishable immortality and absolute transcendental bliss.

And prathishthhA of Truth is BhagvAn. He is the thhekedAr, care-taker of the Truth.


if one compare with raganuga margi,later appears so selfish and narrow minded.they can"t undrestand what is biswa-prana and can never be a true servant of mankind.

I am sorry to say - this is not correct understanding of Uttam AdhikAri bhaktas. What KrushNa actually means by jn~Ana is a pure bhakti.

We have kanishthha adhikAri ("neophyte" - who sees KrushNa only in His Deity form) ,
madhyam adhikAri (who is one in spirit with devotees but discriminates among others) and
uttam adhikAri bhakta.
An uttam adhikAri sees VAsudev in all beings, in all jeev and jad, and all beings in VAsudev. They do not desire any siddhis whatsoever. This is why Radha runs to a dark Tamal tree thinking it is KrushNa.

They are indeed a big servant of mankind, because how can they NOT serve VAsudev who is in all mankind ?

How did they become uttam adhikAris ? KrushNa krupA of course, bhakta , santa krupA, following KrushNa's Words in Bhagvad Gita (which is enough jn~Ana complete in itself) and bhakti.


praNAm

[anirvan]

[
QUOTE=smaranam;64249]Hare KrushNa
sarvam idam khalvidam bramhaN'
and... the GHEE, the ESSENCE, the basis, the pratishthA of THAT bramhaN' is paramAtmA - Shri KrushNa.

I Completely agree with this. Bhagvan is ghee.he is the essence and the cause of very existence of Brahman and creations. Milk is sweet/tasty because of existence Ghee inside. The Universe is created with the inspiration of this ghee.this ghee is the foundation of all bhava/emotions ,which is again the essence of universe,our relationship,mean9ing of life.
Concluding it,he taste himself(ghee taste ghee ) be becoming entire creation through Jiva,brukhsa etc,and again teste it more cosily,more intensely with dear bhaktas in Golak-vrindavan.
But I feel bad when one wrongly says that Bhagvan is first,Brahman originated from his body light and hence inferior. He is essential and existential reason of Brahman.like DNA of a Cell.


uttam adhikAri bhakta.
An uttam adhikAri sees VAsudev in all beings, in all jeev and jad, and all beings in VAsudev. They do not desire any siddhis whatsoever. This is why Radha runs to a dark Tamal tree thinking it is KrushNa.


Secondly… Brahma-jnana or brahmaoplabdhi or brahmananda things. My intention was to show that without true brahmaolabdhi,one can”t be Viswa-prana,he can”t feel the atma and heart of entire creation/universe by becoming their soul.
Advitin Jnani expands his self in vedantic practices until his self consciousness engulf /merge consciousness of saguna,nirguana Brahman. Then he experience his eternal sachidananda self in each and every atoms of universe.He becomes one with BIRATA/bhuma or Brahman.so no body can ever become as broad and loving and can feel other”s pain/pleasure.so he is the greatest sevaka(same as bhagavan is greatest sevaka).
And Uttamadhikari bhakta definitely attains same state as above jnani. The difference in quality of jnana is that Bhakta sees Hari in each atoms,dust,trees,jiva and also inside self,jnani sees self atma in each atoms,jivas etc. AND THIS IS ADVITA JNANA OF BHAKTA.

ADVITA is foundation and bhakta realises it differently,so never admit it as by advitin.

THIS IS CALLED SWAROOP-JNANA LABHA IN BHAKTI PATHA.
Only subtle difference is that,bhakta attains this state without knowledge and conscious effort,neither he want to realize it consciously.he aims and transcends to bhagvan in bhava lok through this atma-jnana state without knowledge.
Realizing that same bhagavan is residing inside him clearly indicates he has realized atma-jnana.
Seva can only be performed between similar individual.Jiva can"t serve divine,jiva has to attain divinity to be able to serve divine. Bhagav only can serve bhagvan. And that’s why a BHAKTA CAN DO SEVA TO GOD BY BECOMING GOD.
This is my Gurudev”s Teachings to us.attain swaroop-jnana via bhakti.then being established in Swaroop,do the seva of bhagavan.here the swaroop will be antaschinta saria(nitya sevak). So how jiva is nitya sevak in swaroop.only after atma-jnana he will establish in swaroop.and that swaroop is nitya-sevak.
This is the speciality of My Gurudev”s truly universal,liberal teaching where there is no opposition between jnana,bhakti.shanka-gauranga are not two,but one. And there is no threat of jnana to bhakti.

The offencive attitude of Vaishnav towards Shankaracharya,jnana marga is rooted in tha fact thatjnana is existential threat to bhakti. But here we saw that true jnana is essential to establish True bhakti. Bhakti manifests with full bloom after jnana is realized,and that jnana is to realize directly(not indirectly) that Bhagaban is residing within us,inside every living,non-living and again has taken personal bhagabat form to accept our Seva.
This is what Bhagavan in Gita told to Arjuna that Jnani is my dearest/true bhakta,infact he is my ATMA.
This is the swaroop of my Guru,first he ascended into Advita brahamoplabdhi via synthetic path(sravan-manan-nididhyasan),and then descended via Bhava sadhna into Bhava lok. Then in his teaching asked to directly realize this Brahmajnana and Bhava-bhakti simultaneously via Bhakti marga.this is the best,ultimate sadhya.sadhana.

Jayaguru.

[smaranam]

PraNAm AnirvanJi
Hare KrushNa

Several things:

There is nothing new being stated in the above post - What you are stating as advaita jnana of the bhakta is something that achintya-bheda-ABHEDA (ONENESS) always agreed upon, with some slight difference (i.e. everyone does not suddenly become God). JnAna of the Bhagvad Gita was NEVER in question. KrushNa's each and every word is sacred and central to bhakti. That jnAna is KrishNa Consciousness. Jnani = fully Krishna conscious person.

In short, we do not need Shankaracharya's bhasya if our ETERNAL Ishta is BhagvAn and Bhagvad prem.


Now, the question : Why is AdiShankara's philosophy considered an obstacle to shuddha bhakti ?

Following is my recent understanding of the VaishNav position on this (please note that i am only relating the observed VaishNav position as a reporter - not to be taken personally by anyone) :

Shankara's bhasya is for those who DENY the eternal form of BhagvAn as ETERNAL. Those who have no interest in eternal bhakti and look at Bhagvan/ Ishvar as temporal product of Maya. Ishvar/Bhagvan - same thing. For the Keval Advaitin ANY form is maya and material in nature - not just Kshirodakshayi Vishnu. The phrase "eternal transcendental spiritual form" is not in their dictionary.

Now you want graduates of this school to enter Krushna-Leela ?

Who is going to rescue them from the nirvikalpa samadhi in BrmhaJyoti ? THEY CANNOT RESCUE THEMSELVES, THEY DO NOT EVEN WISH TO BE RESCUED .
BHAGVAN HIMSELF OR A PURE DEVOTEE THAT TOO BY HIS GRACE AND WISH CAN RESCUE THEM AND BRING THEM INTO LEELA KSHETRA. e.g. your Parampujya Gurudev was rescued by his Gurumaa, Ramkrishna PAramhans by Kali Maa - note: Ramkrishna was not a keval advaitin, he was madly devoted to KAli BEFORE going into nirvikalpa.

So, unless one wins Bhagvad lottery for rescue, one has to DEVELOP love for Bhagvan and that is by going the PURE bhakti marg - not bhakti as ahaMgrhopasana or as a means to an end.

Unless one is a born mahabhagvat (like Adi Shankaracharya) one cannot jump from SOHAM to DAS-ANUDASOHAM without intevention of Bhagvan or His pure devotee. KrushNa gives free will. Why should He bring one into His association if all they want is "I AM THAT" ? And especially if they don't even believe in His form ??

Rather than making ISKCON or VaishNavs the scapegoat, why not take it up with Lord Chaitanya Himself whose instructions are being followed by the VaishNavs :

"Mayavadi bhasya sunile sarvanash." - Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu

It was Forbidden for those on the path of bhakti just as peanuts are forbidden for those with peanut allergy. Because the bhakti marg is complete in itself.

Uttam adhikaris are also content with seeing VAsudev as the Paramatma in every jeev - this is Parmatma realization, this is not equating everything to bhagvan.
Seeing Brahman-consciousness pervading all - this is Bhrahman realization - this is a STEP in Vaishnav Dharma.

NEXT and FINAL step is Bhagvan realization.

So it is not that bhaktas bypass Brahman realization, it is a side effect of bhakti - by grace of Bhagvan.

----

This is what i was told when i asked.

*** I hope i have not offended anyone as the intention was to be objective only. If i have, i beg your forgiveness. ***

Radhe KrushNa

praNAm

[anirvan]

In short, we do not need Shankaracharya's bhasya if our ETERNAL Ishta is BhagvAn and Bhagvad prem.
Shankara's bhasya is for those who DENY the eternal form of BhagvAn as ETERNAL. Those who have no interest in eternal bhakti and look at Bhagvan/ Ishvar as temporal product of Maya. Ishvar/Bhagvan - same thing. For the Keval Advaitin ANY form is maya and material in nature - not just Kshirodakshayi Vishnu. The phrase "eternal transcendental spiritual form" is not in their dictionary.

Pranam paramasnehaspada smaranamji,

Adi Shankar never wanted or gone to debate and convert bisudha bhakta to bring into his fold:) .he was the one of highest category bhakta himself. he established the base/foundation of sanatan dharma...the advita. one has to graduate after finishing foundation course.but not drag back a already graduate to sit in UG class.and again we shouldn"t identify Adishankar with ego-centered aham-brahmasmi cheats.

Second thing...human race is diverse,every one different from others,with different needs,different faith system.

if we indian hindu can"t understand and respect Adi Shankar who had spent each breath for sanatandharma and our upliftment,then there something lacking in us to be a true lover.


Who is going to rescue them from the nirvikalpa samadhi in BrmhaJyoti ? THEY CANNOT RESCUE THEMSELVES, THEY DO NOT EVEN WISH TO BE RESCUED .

Even brahman-nirvan is achieved by grace of same guru or bhagavan.because any sadhna...be yoga,tantra,jnana can take kundalini and consciousness upto ANJA CHAKRA,beyond it its only KRIPA. nirvikalpa is entirely Guru/bhagavn kripa. if one stage is achieved by his kripa,why not next step???


Unless one is a born mahabhagvat (like Adi Shankaracharya) one cannot jump from SOHAM to DAS-ANUDASOHAM without intevention of Bhagvan or His pure devotee.

Again same answer.If bhakti is flowing inside,even if in dried stage,once aham becomes fulfilled with brahman-chetna,the river will become alive...spontaneously.

sat is there always.once chit is realized,does Anand swaroop will be far away?
chit and ananda are two form of same substance.



"Mayavadi bhasya sunile sarvanash." - Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu
It was Forbidden for those on the path of bhakti just as peanuts are forbidden for those with peanut allergy. Because the bhakti marg is complete in itself.

If best things are on offer,why go for good thing? Mahaprabhu has come to bless us supreme purusartha,which fool should go searching other places?
and if coked food is on plate,why go to vegetable market and then cook?

U
ttam adhikaris are also content with seeing VAsudev as the Paramatma in every jeev - this is Parmatma realization, this is not equating everything to bhagvan.

This is not correct statement.when bhakta sees bhagban everywhere,he not only see it in jivas,but also in yamuna"s flow,tamal bana,kali megha,morning lilly,setting sun....anything,anywhere.and become bhavonmada. he can see his syamasundar anywhere.it"s not brahman,paramatma .its bhagvan.

Exclusive paramtma realization happens in ASAMPRNJATA SAMADHI.
Exclusive brahman realization happens in Nirvikalpa/nirvija samadhi.
Exclusive bhagvan realization happens in Bhaba-samadhi.



So it is not that bhaktas bypass Brahman realization, it is a side effect of bhakti - by grace of Bhagvan.

thats why its called :mukti is dasi of bhakti.bhakta never ask or intends but it comes spontaneously before bhava opens completely into him as byproduct.


[SIZE="3"][COLOR="RoyalBlue"]*** I hope i have not offended anyone as the intention was to be objective only.

A true vashnav and krishna kripa dhanya like you can"t offend anyone,you can only bless adhams like us.

pranam

Harekrishna

[anirvan]

Now, the question : Why is AdiShankara's philosophy considered an obstacle to shuddha bhakti ?


Ramkrishna PAramhans by Kali Maa - note: Ramkrishna was not a keval advaitin, he was madly devoted to KAli BEFORE going into nirvikalpa.

So kindly explain why Ramakrishna did jnana sadhna? since he has started sadhna with passionate love of Maa Kali,he was virtually living with the mother,then why Maa asked to do 64 yogini sadhna of tantra?

Then he gained savikalpa jnana(jnana of one brahmanda). then again with instruction of Maa,he undergone vedantik sannyas initiation under GurU Totapuri
and then Nirvikalpa samadhi to attain brahma sajujya--the jnana of entire creation(infinite brahmanda) along with nirguna brahman?

And then his real Bhava sadhna started.

Its not easy to be uttamadhikari.one in a billion is also rare. and real bhava starts only after atma-jnana. when you dont know the swaroop of bhagvan,swaroop of self,where is question of love???

A animal can"t love and do proper seva to a human.similarly a emotionally mad human can"t do real seva of bhagvan.he has to ascend to that stature to be level with bhagvan,then he can understand what is bhagban. he has to be as broad,liberal,as gig as bhagvan to be able to start a relationship.

Even for a normal matrimony,similar status,thinking,education are required for a succesful marriage.

Without brahma-jnana,most of so called vaishnav only hallucinates,as your continuous thought cause a illusory world according to your thought.it can"t be bhava/darshan.

Again examples of DHRUVA,PRAHLAD are there.after their bhagvat darshan,why then they did vedanta jnana sadhna,then became brahma-vid and then they ascended to bhava? thses are too with order from bhagvan only.

Jayaguru

[smaranam]

PraNAm AnirvanJi

You know what is funny - there isn't a total disagreement as such, and readers are probably wondering ... so.. what's the point.

Is this Leela or what ?

I don't have a lot of time but let's see...

again we shouldn"t identify Adishankar with ego-centered aham-brahmasmi cheats.

No one does that. The most accused (you know who) also consider him as an avatAr of Shambhu Shankar.


Second thing...human race is diverse,every one different from others,with different needs,different faith system.

Of course.


if we indian hindu can"t understand and respect Adi Shankar who had spent each breath for sanatandharma and our upliftment,then there something lacking in us to be a true lover.

Who is disrespecting him ? I was impressed. I thought the question was why VaishNavs find his philosophy unfavorable for bhakti - and you seem to agree.


Even brahman-nirvan is achieved by grace of same guru or bhagavan. nirvikalpa is entirely Guru/bhagavn kripa. if one stage is achieved by his kripa,why not next step??? If bhakti is flowing inside,even if in dried stage,once aham becomes fulfilled with brahman-chetna,the river will become alive...spontaneously.

IF bhakti is flowing. Because KrushNa gives free will.

** You may be surprised to hear that i had the same questions like you more than a year ago - and my heart would go all out to those respected vedantins, scientific thinkers, whenmayavad and mayavadis were condemnded - There is a whole thread i can show you. I don't want to bring it here, but here is a section of what i wrote to them back then:



"me: Also, neither the scriptures nor Adi Shankaracharya define what happens exactly after liberation , be it jivanmukti or videhamukti , whether there is bhakti or not. It is left open for the experience of the seeker.
We do not know for sure that the liberated Jnanis are dormant in BrahmaJyoti, or what they do after videhamukti.
Nor do we know what state bhaktas reach later on, and whom they merge into -
Nanda , Yashoda, Rupa , Lalita
Uddhav, Satyabhama , Hanuman, Sita
(or Radha - why not ? Whose mood do we think Jaydev was in ? )

So, at the highest Parmarthik level, Bhakti and Jnana are not really seperate, it is illusion to think they are.
....
..
GV: This 'merging' is a state of ecstasy, not a real merging

me: Of Course :) So its OK for devotees to be in the mood of Radha, and jnanis to be in the mood of Brahman' "



and the thread went on.


If best things are on offer,why go for good thing? Mahaprabhu has come to bless us supreme purusartha,which fool should go searching other places? and if coked food is on plate,why go to vegetable market and then cook?

You are agreeing that there is no need to go via Shankar bhasya if one comes across Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. SO What is the whole argument about ? There is NO Argument :)


when bhakta sees bhagban everywhere,he not only see it in jivas,but also in yamuna"s flow,tamal bana,kali megha,morning lilly,setting sun....anything,anywhere.and become bhavonmada. he can see his syamasundar anywhere.it"s not brahman,paramatma .its bhagvan.

Agree completely,

Yamuna madhura, vicci madhura, salilam kamalam hrudayam gamanam gopi gavo gunja mAlA pushpa ........
madhurAdhipater akhilam madhuram - MadhurAshtak - this shows Vallabhacharya's beautiful bhAv.


A true vashnav and krishna kripa dhanya like you can"t offend anyone,you can only bless adhams like us.

I don't deserve such kind words that you keep repeating. May Shri KrushNa continue to bless you and everyone.
Although the words will not affect me since KrushNa is merciful, yet... sakhiyon ka ego dAv pe lagAna acchi baat nahi hai.


Its not easy to be uttamadhikari.one in a billion is also rare. and real bhava starts only after atma-jnana. when you dont know the swaroop of bhagvan,swaroop of self,where is question of love???

TRUE, but not all that rare either. Pure devotees, uttam adhikaris come down to madhyam adhikari level to be an acharya.


Without brahma-jnana,most of so called vaishnav only hallucinates,as your continuous thought cause a illusory world according to your thought.it can"t be bhava/darshan.

No comments


praNAm

MadhurAdhipater akhilam madhuram

[anirvan]

Now, the question : Why is AdiShankara's philosophy considered an obstacle to shuddha bhakti ?


Now i will conclude this thread with above question as this is the point that makes a bhakta irritate with jnana,as they afraid that it may steal away the bhakti.and offence is best defence ...the start offence:)

Adishankara"s philosophy is not a obstacle to bhakti.the jnana is not obstacle to bhakti.

ITS DEZIRE FOR MOKHSA THAT IS THE OBSTACLE TO BHAKTI,NOT JNANA ITSELF !!!

"LOVE AND KNOWLEDGE ARE NOT TWO NATURALLY EXCLUSIVE FACULTIES.LOVE IS THE CULMINATING POINT IN A SERIES OF WHICH KNOWLEDGE IS THE LAST STAGE BUT ONE "
ONLY WITH BHAKTI,JNANA AND PARABHAKTI CAN BE SURELY ACHIEVED.

This is what i learnt from my Gurudev.this is what Viveakananda has said in devavani,and also by Ramakrishna pramahansa.
Bhakti is based upon pure unconditional love.so if anything,even mokhsa,even milanechha with krishna is not compatible with love.love is pure giving.if a bhakta receives anything from bhagvan,then his bhakti get paid.so why bhagvan will be indebted to him?so as such jnana ichha is not obstacle,but the very purpose of mokhsa is a obstacle.

Bhagvan was testing your humility through me:) ,so he has already stopped these exam after your passing with flying colour.

See Mahaprabhu was parambrahman bhagvan himself,when bhagvan come to a sadhaka,sadhaka will throw his all sadhna and surrender at bhagban"s feet.same thing happened in chaitanyavtar.so why anymore dry jnana exercise?so everybody surrender at his lotus feet including prakasananda etc.

jnana se unhe jana ja sakta hai,par dil nahi bharta hai,unhe dil se lagake chumne se his prana saant ho jati hai hamesha keliya.

pranam

Jai radhamohan

[grames]

Dear Smaranam,

A fantastic and top class message with choice of complete words. Amazed and this post of you should be read, understood with great passion and open mind. All are Krshna's grace and reading from your fingers is our luck.

Hare Krshna!

[smaranam]

Dear GramesJi

Your certificate on post #11 makes me delighted like a kindergartner receiving a prize. The words flow by KrushNa's Grace no doubt , but just see His Mercy, He partly distributes it via others too - like my 'Theistic Philosopher' mentor-guide GramesJi :)

I don't have to remind you of our conversations from time to time - mostly initiated by you with "smaranam, what are you doing ?!" The ratna-jewels that you added to my jholi in the form of knowledge, as well as by my other [shiksha] gurus - along with what KrushNa provides - has been all combined here.

Your humility is inspiring - always staying in the background and supplying the necessary.

Hare KrushNa

many praNAms

[smaranam]

Hare KrushNa

Just one last point:


Its not easy to be uttamadhikari.one in a billion is also rare.


Uttam Adhikaris are not all that rare in todays world also. They may be hidden from view. One has to be qualified for KrushNa to bring them in touch with an uttam adhikari.

Most of the times an uttam adhikari , if not secluded in a far off place, hides the adhikar and comes down to the level of madhyam adhikAri to be an AchArya, share vidyA. Basically they are pure devotees (see qualities of pure devotees)
This is because an uttam adhikari cannot really be a formal acharya and interact with many people at their level - since it is essential to apply discrimination for the sake of others, and uttam adhikaris as we know cannot discriminate.

This is why Mahaprabhu (Chaitanya) hardly preached, left nothing except the ShikshAshtak in writing. It was all His Leela that associates observed and soaked in, and in fact had to take care of Him when He would fall unconscious or almost drown in Bay of Bengal thinking it is the YamunA.

Haridas Thakur kept chanting mahamantra, and is the NAmAcharya.

Here is a good post about BhaktisiddhAnta Saraswati Thakrur's article:

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/hare-krishna-forum/374415-how-find-mantra-siddha-maha-bhagavat-uttam-adhikari-sadguru.html

He says, the uttam adhikari is there, it is rare to find people willing to serve them. Being a shishya is also an adhikar.

praNAm

[anirvan]

Most of the times an uttam adhikari , if not secluded in a far off place, hides the adhikar and comes down to the level of madhyam adhikAri to be an AchArya, share vidyA. Basically they are pure devotees (see qualities of pure devotees)
This is because an uttam adhikari cannot really be a formal acharya and interact with many people at their level - since it is essential to apply discrimination for the sake of others, and uttam adhikaris as we know cannot discriminate.
Because that condition is not practically suitable to to stay in society.and next to imposible to teach.but those who has that ability to control the bhava by atma-shakti and sadhna can become comlete normal human and come to be as a teacher.

The fact is the highest bhava and even brahmachetna,both are turiyatita nirguna state,and nirguna state is beyond mind-body.to be able to teach a human with mind,body...that is saguna,one has to become saguna...descnding down.

Thats why Guruchakra is just below sahasrara chakra.parambrahman himself descends down from nirguna to become saguna in order to be able to teach for Jivoddhar.

This is why Mahaprabhu (Chaitanya) hardly preached,

He came to teach by practice for entire world,not as a sadguru/teacher to individual.this is the difference between a sadguru and avtar.

Avatar comes for entire generation,so they spread a new bhava,new knowledge.Its sadguru who implement this new bhava in individual life by teaching aswell also showing by practice.

[Tirisilex]

I still do not understand what Brahma is. Is Brahma Spiritual reality and Maya Material reality? I'm so lost on this..

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


I still do not understand what Brahma is. Is Brahma Spiritual reality and Maya Material reality? I'm so lost on this..

It seems to me aligning māyā to any reality will be a challanging conversation. Yet I see why you would say it the way you have presented it.
Māyā may be better understood as an ~experience~. Since it is one's own experience some call it reality, yet this is not so.

Also note the spelling: brahma is used for the impersonal Spirit/ Being, pure existence itself, and the brahmā for the personal god. Yet this is nominclature, no? Brahma = Brahman = Reality. There is no-thing that is not this Brahman; yet to talk about it we seperate difference ideas out for one's contemplation and understanding.

These ideas are a start and not the final say-so.

praṇām

[Tirisilex]

I do not understand how Brahman relates to Krishna..

[smaranam]

I do not understand how Brahman relates to Krishna..

Please read the first response to OP - carefully.

1. "Bhagavān, or the Personality of Godhead, is the last word of the Absolute Truth. Paramātmā is the partial representation of the Personality of Godhead, and impersonal Brahman is the glowing effulgence of the Personality of Godhead, as the sun rays are to the sun-god. "

- Shrila PrabhupAd's purport to SB 1.2.11 Ref: http://vedabase.net/


2. bhahmANo hi pratishthA aham amrutasyAvyayasya cha
shAshvatasya cha dharmasya sukhasyaikAntikasya cha - BG 14.27

Verily I am the original foundation (prathishthhA) of [impersonal] BrahmaN and of eternal righteousness; of imperishable immortality and absolute transcendental bliss.

And prathishthhA of impersonal Truth is BhagvAn - Shri KrushNa / VishNu, NArAyaN. He is the thhekedAr, care-taker of the Truth.


---

Impersonal formless Brahman - i.e. entire existence and the white screen on which that existence lies, is the impersonal aspect and Shri KrushNa is the root, source, FOUNDATION, resting place, basis of that Brahman.

analogy:
KrushNa = Sun Himself
Brahman = effulgence of the Sun.

[smaranam]

Shrī Īśopaniṣad 16 (http://sriisopanisad.com/16/en)

pūṣann ekarṣe yama sūrya prājāpatya
vyūha raśmīn samūha
tejo yat te rūpaḿ kalyāṇa-tamaḿ
tat te paśyāmi yo 'sāv asau puruṣaḥ so 'ham asmi

O my Lord, O primeval philosopher, maintainer of the universe, O regulating principle, destination of the pure devotees, well-wisher of the progenitors of mankind, please remove the effulgence of Your transcendental rays so that I can see Your form of bliss. You are the eternal Purusha (as GodHead) , like unto the sun, as am I (purusha as living entity).

PURPORT: The sun and its rays are one and the same qualitatively. Similarly, the Lord and the living entities are one and the same in quality. The sun is one, but the molecules of the sun's rays are innumerable. The sun's rays constitute part of the sun, and the sun and its rays conjointly constitute the complete sun. Within the sun itself resides the sun-god, and similarly within the supreme spiritual planet, Goloka Vṛndāvana, from which the brahmajyoti effulgence is emanating, the Lord enjoys His eternal pastimes...
The brahmajyoti is described in the Brahma-saḿhitā as the rays emanating from that supreme spiritual planet, Goloka Vṛndāvana, just as the sun's rays emanate from the sun globe. Until one surpasses the glare of the brahmajyoti, one cannot receive information of the land of the Lord....
Śrī Īśopaniṣad petitions the Lord to remove the effulgent rays of the brahmajyoti so that the pure devotee can see His all-blissful transcendental form
By realizing the impersonal brahmajyoti, one experiences the auspicious aspect of the Supreme, and by realizing the Paramātmā, or all-pervading feature of the Supreme, one experiences an even more auspicious enlightenment. But by meeting the Personality of Godhead Himself face to face, the devotee experiences the most auspicious feature of the Supreme. Since He is addressed as the primeval philosopher and maintainer and well-wisher of the universe, the Supreme Truth cannot be impersonal. This is the verdict of Śrī Īśopaniṣad. The word pūṣan ("maintainer") is especially significant, for although the Lord maintains all beings, He specifically maintains His devotees. After surpassing the impersonal brahmajyoti and seeing the personal aspect of the Lord and His most auspicious eternal form, the devotee realizes the Absolute Truth in full....

Thus there is a gulf of difference between the living entity (ātmā) and the controlling Lord (Paramātmā), the soul and the Supersoul. Paramātmā is the controller, and the ātmā is the controlled; therefore they are in different categories. Because the Paramātmā fully cooperates with the ātmā, He is known as the constant companion of the living being.

The all-pervading feature of the Lord — which exists in all circumstances of waking and sleeping as well as in potential states and from which the jīva-śakti (living force) is generated as both conditioned and liberated souls — is known as Brahman. Since the Lord is the origin of both Paramātmā and Brahman, He is the origin of all living entities and all else that exists. One who knows this engages himself at once in the devotional service of the Lord.

praNAm

[sarangi dasi]

I do not understand how Brahman relates to Krishna..

yes, you seem to be asking the RELATIONSHIP between them rather than the singular or absolute status (or otherwise) type statements. you are asking this in the context of ISKCON theology which is a progressive (due to Shreela Bhaktivinoda Tha[a]kur) expressdion of Chaitanyaite devotionalism.

Two books by AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupa[a]da (the founding acharaya of ISKCON) are critical to obtain an insight into the ISKCON position on this:
1) The Golden Avatar, Teachings of Lord Chaitanya
2) The Nectar of Devotion, the Complete Science of Bhakti Yoga.

In these books you will find various statements on the RELATIONSHIP between Brahman and Krishna, Brahman realisation and Bhagavan realisation and so on. For example some of the positions MAY be summarised as:

a. Krishna (Bhagavan), Paramatman and Brahman are different expressions/perspectives of the Divine Being of which Krishna is the superior focus for the devotee.
b. One needs to be Brahman realised to a be on the pure platform of devotional service but the bona fide guided beginner practice of devotional service can, itself, spontaneously or naturally lead to the pure platform (where the Brahman realisation is incidental, rather than critical)
c. Brahman and Brahmajyoti (the effulgence of Brahman) are equated as the same thing despite the fact that the books are replete with the analogy of the sun and the sunlight being both different and the same.
d. The light emanating from Krishna is equated with the Brahmajyoti but to an extent that Brahmajyoti monopolises the conception of Brahman (interestly while the sunlight does not monopolise the conception of the sun).
e. "Attachment" to Brahman can impede devotional service.

I have yet to come across any ISKCON devotees who have managed to overcome some of the direct and implied contradictions in these (and other) positions in their understanding of Gaudiya theology/philosophy that comprehends ontology of Brahman and Krishna and their relationship.

(Personally speaking, I do not feel there is a contradiction with the postions in a. or b.)

[smaranam]

c. Brahman and Brahmajyoti (the effulgence of Brahman) are equated as the same thing despite the fact that the books are replete with the analogy of the sun and the sunlight being both different and the same.

Hare KrushNa , Sarangiji,

The sun and sunlight are simultaneously same and different, because sun is ParaBrahman', the pratishThA, basis of sunlight i.e. brahman (BrahmANohi pratishThA aham - BG 14). On the other hand, what is conventionally called Brahman IS the BrahmaJyoti, the energy, effulgence, radiance of KrushNa.



d. The light emanating from Krishna is equated with the Brahmajyoti but to an extent that Brahmajyoti monopolises the conception of Brahman (interestly while the sunlight does not monopolise the conception of the sun).

Again, the sunlight is not supposed to monopolise the conception of sun because the sun is ParaBrahman Parameshwar BhagvAn, not just Brahman.


e. "Attachment" to Brahman can impede devotional service.

As long as Brahman is understood as the potent aspect, subtle energy of the KrushNa, BhagvAn, ParaBrahman, Parameshwar, then this statement is very easy to understand.
Attachment to Brahman means the conventional attachment to nirguN nirAkAr avyakta, and hence to kaivalya-moksha. It is attachment to this state of kaivalya-moksha that is an impedement to devotional service. Studying this aspect of the Divine automatically brings this moksha attachment, at least in ordinary jivas.

Clearly, in this state of kaivalya, there is no contemplation on devotional service ... to .... whom ? since there is no one around, not even the jiva herself. This cannot be a progressive post-Chaitanya idea, as Lord Chaitanya Himself forbade this attachment for devotees : " _________ _________ sunile sarvanash"


If the intention is to understand what appears as contradictions, it can be done, by the Lord's Merciful Grace, although there will always be the achintya (inconceivable). I am not qualified to untie the knots, but only stay at the Lotus Feet of Giridhar-MohanA, His devotees and Acharyas and only hope that this added input will help some.


praNAm

[smaranam]

The all-pervading feature of the Lord — which exists in all circumstances of waking and sleeping as well as in potential states and from which the jīva-śakti (living force) is generated as both conditioned and liberated souls — is known as Brahman.
- Bhaktivedanta Swami PrabhupAd, Purport to Ishopanishad 16

Hare KrushNa

[Yogkriya]

They want to say that Personal form is first and brahman(sunrays) part is second.so 1st is origin of second. which is completely wrong and against the very ethos of advita.

Its like butter in milk. Brahman is the milk. Butter is Bhagaban(whichever name you may call him like krishna/Ram/Siva).

So in Brahmananda anubhuti,one experience both componenets......the all pervading akhana-sachidananda tattva plus Bhagaban tattva ,but not like personal bhagaban of bhaktas. so they taste butter,but mixed with milk.

But a bhakta who enter LEELA ,serve and experience Personal Bhagaban,its more pure,more loving and more rasa-yukta.so its like tasting butter directly.
but Bhakta of such qualities definitely also miss the other parts of milk.so they miss swaroop-ananda and they can"t be as liberal and broad as advitin.

this is the reason,pure bhakti-margi appears fundamentalist,but it shows their un-diluted love for divine only.so we can view this as positive things.:)

This is the difference between Nitya and leela.

Namaskar Anirvan !

Excellent post. :)
The Brahm / God of the Vedas is nirgun, nirakar. The milk.
So we accept the formless and the forms without doing the God positioning.
Form is easier to meditate upon for humans that have easier relation to forms.
Kind regards,

Yogkriya

[smaranam]

Namaste,

We don't have to debate over the medium of language and words, but we have to live with two major conclusions of the Vedas. This post is not some personal ego-endeavour, but only for the record, and FYI. Then i'll be gone.



The Brahm / God of the Vedas is nirgun, nirakar. The milk
This is only one school of thought so let me put here the other view also:

The word nirguN has to have a clear definition - beyond and untouched by the three material guNas, but possessing infinite spiritual transcendental qualities. NirAkAr is only a word. His rUpa is achintya, incomprehensible AkAr, incomprehensible to the embodied because it is spiritual, not material.

BG 11.54 bhaktyā tv ananyayā śakya
aham evaḿ-vidho 'rjuna
jñātuḿ draṣṭuḿ ca tattvena
praveṣṭuḿ ca parantapa

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 1.2.11 Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān.

The Upanishad and Brahma-sUtra bhAsya from other schools (Shri-Ramanuj, Brahma-Madhav, Rudra-Vishnuswami , Kumar-Nimbarka) - show that God of the Vedas is a Person with achintya rUpa, not ultimately nirakar, the milk.

Another source:
Atma and Bramha in Upanishads (http://www.encyclopediaofauthentichinduism.org/articles/9_the_terms_atma.htm) - Encyclopedia of Authentic Hinduism
FORMS OF GOD AND THEIR DIVINE ABODES (http://www.encyclopediaofauthentichinduism.org/articles/65.2.htm)

--------

Shrimad Bhagvatam, the crown-jewel of all purANs, explains the transcendental qualities, lilas, and names of Parameshwar. It was written by the same VedVyas - not with an intention to add a fairy-tale extension to Upanishads and Bramha-sUtras, but to bring out the true purpose and essence of the Vedas.



God has a form, but it is not a form like ours. His form is sac-cid-ananda, but ours is just the opposite. God's form is sat, eternally existing, while man's form is asat, temporary. God's form is cit, full of knowledge, but ours is acit, full of ignorance. And His form is full of ananda, bliss, but ours is full of nirananda, misery. It is only because we cannot conceive of a form so different from ours that sometimes it is said God is nirakara, without form.

God's form is transcendental. That means His body is not material but spiritual. His form is of a different nature than that to which we are accustomed. In the Vedas it is said that God sees but that He has no eyes or eyes everywhere. This means that God's eyes are unlike ours--they are spiritual, not material. We can see only so far, whereas God can see everything because He has eyes everywhere. His eyes, His form, His hands and legs are of a different nature than ours.”

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya
praNAm