PDA

View Full Version : is this true?



Kumar_Das
28 September 2011, 12:18 PM
I read this on wiki seems like an ISCKONITE did this.



For of Vishnu is eternal, He is 2 or four-handed, but it is rather so that humans are similar to Vishnu, but not that God, Vishnu is created by human and humans ascribe to Him human features: "Those who adhere to the Māyāvāda philosophy of anthropomorphism say, "The Absolute Truth is impersonal, but because we are persons we imagine that the Absolute Truth is also a person." This is a mistake, and in fact just the opposite is true. We have two hands, two legs, and a head because God Himself has these same features. We have personal forms because we are reflections of God."


Really? Is that what ISCKON believes?

You're telling me that God really is the image of Lord Vishnu in an anthropomorphic manner? God who can create all the varieties of creatures, Himself has an actual anthropomorphic form(atleast you're telling that is His natural state?)? Don't you think it must be the height of human ego to say "God created man in His own image"? Sounds like some christian talk.

Ananda
28 September 2011, 02:21 PM
Hello Kumar_Das,


What an unusual statement, thanks for bringing it to our attention.



"Those who adhere to the Māyāvāda philosophy of anthropomorphism say, "The Absolute Truth is impersonal, but because we are persons we imagine that the Absolute Truth is also a person."

I wonder what ' Māyāvāda philosophy of anthropomorphism' this fellow is referring to here? As far as I am aware there is no such philosophy. Anthropomorphism is something which Advaita (presuming that Māyāvāda here means Advaita) strictly tries to avoid. Anthropomorphism is infact exactly what this person subscribes to when he says;


He is 2 or four-handed

and


God Himself has these same features

Furthermore, Advaita does not say that 'we are persons who imagine the Absolute as a person', no, it says that neither oneself nor Brahman can be considered 'persons' in any anthropomorphic sense, a) because they are both without form and b) because they are identical. Why must these people insist on erecting strawmen of Advaita philosophy?



We have two hands, two legs, and a head because God Himself has these same features.

A choice selection from the Śvetāśvatara Upanishad clearly demonstrates a) that God is figuratively ascribed anthropomorphic features because he is all-pervading and the very essence of everything that exists, b)that God is the same as the indwelling Self within each body and c)that, though pervading all bodies and assuming their form, God is infact formless and without sense organs/ organs of action.



7. Those who know beyond this the High Brahman, the vast, hidden in the bodies of all creatures, and alone enveloping everything, as the Lord, they become immortal.

8. I know that great person (purusha) of sunlike lustre beyond the darkness. A man who knows him truly, passes over death; there is no other path to go.

9. This whole universe is filled by this person (purusha), to whom there is nothing superior, from whom there is nothing different, than whom there is nothing smaller or larger, who stands alone, fixed like a tree in the sky.

10. That which is beyond this world is without form and without suffering. They who know it, become immortal, but others suffer pain indeed.

11. That Bhagavat exists in the faces, the heads, the necks of all, he dwells in the cave (of the heart) of all beings, he is all-pervading, therefore he is the omnipresent Siva.

12. That person (purusha) is the great lord; he is the mover of existence, he possesses that purest power of reaching everything, he is light, he is undecaying.

13. The person (purusha), not larger than a thumb, dwelling within, always dwelling in the heart of man, is perceived by the heart, the thought, the mind: they who know it become immortal.

14. The person (purusha) with a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, a thousand feet, having compassed the earth on every side, extends beyond it by ten fingers’ breadth.

15. That person alone (purusha) is all this, what has been and what will be; he is also the lord of immortality; he is whatever grows by food.

16. Its hands and feet are everywhere, its eyes and head are everywhere, its ears are everywhere, it stands encompassing all in the world.

17. Separate from all the senses, yet reflecting the qualities of all the senses, it is the lord and ruler of all, it is the great refuge of all.

18. The embodied spirit within the town with nine gates, the bird, flutters outwards, the ruler of the whole world, of all that rests and of all that moves.

19. Grasping without hands, hasting without feet, he sees without eyes, he hears without ears. He knows what can be known, but no one knows him; they call him the first, the great person (purusha).

20. The Self, smaller than small, greater than great, is hidden in the heart of the creature. A man who has left all grief behind, sees the majesty, the Lord, the passionless, by the grace of the creator (the Lord).

21. I know this undecaying, ancient one, the self of all things, being infinite and omnipresent. They declare that in him all birth is stopped, for the Brahma-students proclaim him to be eternal.


The Upanishad also says;


You are woman; you are man; you are boy and you are girl; you are the shivering old man helped by a stick; you are born in the form of this world.

and


You are the blue butterfly, the green-eyed parrot and the lightning cloud. You are the seasons and the seas. You are the one without any beginning; you are omnipresent; all the worlds are born out of you.

So Brahman is identified with everything; every body is the body of Brahman, because out of Brahman all bodies, all objects exist. As the indwelling Self, however, Brahman has no form, it is distinct from the senses, from the organs, from the mind, and is all pervading light (awareness).

This kind of circular reasoning as 'we have two hands and two feet because God does' is very juvenile- one must look beyond the mere names and forms to see the bodiless Self within all of the bodies, that one is Brahman. Advaitins are accused by these people of making stuff up, but on the contrary Advaita adheres strictly to traditional teaching by placing the greatest emphasis on the shruti rather than the smriti. You will find that these types of people only very rarely quote verses from the shruti to support their assertions, whereas the opposite is true for 'Māyāvādas'.



:)

Kismet
28 September 2011, 02:34 PM
I read this on wiki seems like an ISCKONITE did this.

Really? Is that what ISCKON believes?

You're telling me that God really is the image of Lord Vishnu in an anthropomorphic manner? God who can create all the varieties of creatures, Himself has an actual anthropomorphic form(atleast you're telling that is His natural state?)? Don't you think it must be the height of human ego to say "God created man in His own image"? Sounds like some christian talk.

I agree that it is infinitely short-sighted to say that God must look "exactly" like a human being. That is not the sort of knowledge we could ever be privy to here and now. What is more, as you say it neglects all the varieties of creatures, not just in this universe, but in all universes.

Is God's potency really so weak that humanity alone must exhaust his multifaceted and numberless energies? How depressing!

shian
28 September 2011, 11:49 PM
now , I dont talk about Krsna Baghavan
i talk about ISKCON, they already become more and more faint.
we'll see