All are in Me, but I not in them....

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Atanu ji
sorry for the delay in answering, i am bit busy for the next few weeks.

I Agree. This is what I am telling again and again. Only immature will use these verses to prove that the Lord's form is as they have clothed Him. Actually it is Lord's maya form.

So let us not cloth him, not even with maya, he is not saying anywhere that this is his maya form, infact he say he menifests, cotroling the nature, and using maya he is born.
He further explains in verse 9 that one who understands his divyam janma nd karma reaches him.point is his menifestion is divya and not mayic. Also there is no question of him being devoid of form as he explains in verse 11.52

sri-bhagavan uvaca
su-durdarsam idam rupam
drstavan asi yan mama
deva apy asya rupasya
nityam darsana-kanksinah

The Blessed Lord said: My dear Arjuna, the form which you are now seeing is very difficult to behold. Even the Devas are ever seeking the opportunity to see this form which is so dear.

And what Arjuna saw will not be seen by an englishman ever. These visions are as per culture and as per pre-dilections.

I do not understand the conection, care to explain further if you see fit.

What underlies the Maya body? That same Atma is the substratum knowledge and the knower in every form. And that is Paratpara. Beyond cognition by any means since by that only, all cognitions is effected.

What cognizes my eyes cannot be cognized by my eyes. What cognizes my hearing cannot be cognized by my ears. Thus:

Without first knowing the small I,all this discussion will fail to unravel the paratpara.
Whose upadhi is to cognize, who is karma bound, what is its nature?
What is the purpose of our very existance?

As you say Turiya Self remains Turiya Self --- shivoadvaitam, never affected by its maya so who is suffering the pangs of material nature?

HK claims of knowing the transcendental form of Lord is a bag of gas, as if Prabhupada has seen the transcendental form. It is their imagination they love, since Rig Veda says: Those who have clothed Him, surely from them He is hidden (Asiya Vamiya Sukta).

I don’t think it is fair to single out hk, the whole off Bhakti movement woluld fall in this category of yours, weather srila Prabhupada, who has achieved in his own way, a lot of following and brought Krishna to whole world, weather he has seen the transcendental form, I can not elabrate.what one see or taste can not be explained in words or proved, we can only campare notes. Krishna does say

naham vedair na tapasa
na danena na cejyaya
sakya evam-vidho drastum
drstavan asi mam yatha
The form which you are seeing with your transcendental eyes cannot be understood simply by studying the Vedas, nor by undergoing serious penances, nor by charity, nor by worship. It is not by these means that one can see Me as I am. (11.53)

bhaktya tv ananyaya sakya
aham evam-vidho 'rjuna
jnatum drastum ca tattvena
pravestum ca parantapa

My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be understood as I am, standing before you, and can thus be seen directly. Only in this way can you enter into the mysteries of My understanding. (11.54)

a) All beings are in Me, but I am not in them, -------

b)13. 17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings; He is to be known as the supporter of beings; He devours and He generates also.


If pervasion was the only case then the above two verses would definitely be contradicting. The full import is that Brahman remains intact and infinite, even when infinite forms are isolated as spandan through sadhana:

There is nothing clear-cut as Krishna explains

na ca mat-sthani bhutani
pasya me yogam aisvaram
bhuta-bhrn na ca bhuta-stho
mamatma bhuta-bhavanah


And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities, and although I am everywhere, still My Self is the very source of creation.

The contradictions, if at all, is in our understanding. There is no argument in Brahman being neither intact nor there is any doubt in my mind that all that be are in this Brahman.

Therefore when krishna says na tv evaham jatu nasam
na tvam neme janadhipah
na caiva na bhavisyamah
sarve vayam atah param
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.(2.12)

Now, what is this You and I? And what is this Future?

If param atma was only apparently divided then where from this I and You came into being? Isn't the I and You also apparent? Isn't 'I' after Pragnya? And what is this 'future'? Isn't this about after awareness of time? Does this verse represent the truth beyond time?

The verse spoken by Krishna represent the truth, what is apparent is param atma being divided, there is no question of I and you being apparent only. The fact is we are eternal, everything that exist is eternal, only difference is this jivas are caught in this material world which has apparent beginning and end and identifying with the material existence one conceives the idea of timeframe. While the param atma who remains beyond the material existence and always in control, as witness to our karma is perceived to be apparently divided.

Indeed what is this you and I what is this future? Question does not arise in advaitic Turiya so whose questions are this whose upadhi is it?

Dear Ganeshprasad Ji, Turiya is beyond Pragnya and Time. This cited verse on 'i and you and kings' cannot overrule the fully advaitic verse: And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings. And it also does not over-rule the ONE WITHOUT A SECOND (shivoadvaita atma). This also does not speak of the condition: '---when light arises there is no day and night, only the blessed one exists -----'.

There is no question of overrule anything, it is our understanding of the truth or the lack of it (me) and the facts that are present in front of us, trying to make sense of it all. The truth is beyond explanation only self-realization can reveal what is the essence that lies beyond the material manifestation. We all are conscious being aware of this existence, param atma is never deluded but we are, we can not become that we are not.

Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.

tam eva saranam gaccha
sarva-bhavena bharata
tat-prasadat param santim
sthanam prapsyasi sasvatam

Seek refuge in Him alone with all your heart, O Arjuna. By His grace you shall attain supreme peace and the eternal abode. (18.62)


Jai Shree Ram

[atanu]

Namaste Ganesh Prasad Ji,

You have posted a beautiful piece. I agree to most of your views except a few differences, which we may agree to keep for future consideration. Diversity arising out of Pragnya is the nature. Only a handful can enter Turiya, since that will require absence of ego desires. Even deep sleep happens when there is no desire. Turiya cannot be attained unless individuality and its desires are not discarded as false. What do we do? Worship the highest form of Turiya – the SARVESVARA who is Lord Pragnya – SARVASYA YONI. The highest form is desireless. Worshiping Him, being at his feet, all desires are fulfilled and desires are attenuated. For 99% jivas this is true.

Every time a painful thought/experience surfaces, I have enquired who is pained? I have not found the ‘Atanu’ that feels the pain. Atanu is just a name which thinks that it is separate from the Universe and is pained when the world is perceived to be kicking Atanu.
I realize that every act of pain is an act of grace of God, to push the mind to the Self. Lord says: Do not desire anya devata, desire only Me. I am the Self. And the Self is indeed defined as shivo advaita atma. As per my understanding, knowing the advaita atma as another being is impossible. Shri Krishna also teaches the same but many do not recognize it. Lord says: I am the Self. Abide in ME. Then He says: Yogis who abide ceaselessly in Me, I am in him and He is in ME. In such a case there is no scope of any boundary here.

Shrutivipratipannaa te yadaa sthaasyati nishchalaa;
Samaadhaavachalaa buddhistadaa yogam avaapsyasi.

2.53. When thy intellect, perplexed by what thou hast heard, shall stand immovable and steady in the Self, then thou shalt attain Self-realisation.

tam eva saranam gaccha
sarva-bhavena bharata
tat-prasadat param santim
sthanam prapsyasi sasvatam

Seek refuge in Him alone with all your heart, O Arjuna. By His grace you shall attain supreme peace and the eternal abode. (18.62)

Yes I agree.

This param santim sasvatam is the abode, goal and advaita. One without a second. We have already seen

13. 17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings;


And we have seen:

Svet. Upanishad

IV-18: When light rises, there is neither day nor night, neither being nor non-being. There is only that Shiva who is imperishable, and who is worthy of being adored by the creator. From Him has proceeded the ancient wisdom (Pragnya).


The experience while one is in ignorance cannot be true. Ignorance cannot be proven by saying it is Pratayksha that we exist. A mirage is also Pratayksha. Sun rotating around the earth is Pratayksha. That an apple falls is Pratyaksha. But an apple does not fall, it is attracted towards earth. Up-down; today-tommorrow etc. seem pratyaksha but they are just concepts of mind, which is nature of Pragnya.

So let us not cloth him, not even with maya, he is not saying anywhere that this is his maya form, infact he say he menifests, cotroling the nature, and using maya he is born.
He further explains in verse 9 that one who understands his divyam janma nd karma reaches him.point is his menifestion is divya and not mayic. Also there is no question of him being devoid of form as he explains in verse 11.52

Yes. Rig Veda says that those who know the divine birth of Vishnu know correctly. The birth is from the divine source but only using the potency, which is not a being. So, Dvaita never actually happens. It happens is sahasra sira. And then sahasra sira only teaches us that: ATMA CANNOT BE CUT.

sri-bhagavan uvaca
su-durdarsam idam rupam
drstavan asi yan mama
deva apy asya rupasya
nityam darsana-kanksinah

The Blessed Lord said: My dear Arjuna, the form which you are now seeing is very difficult to behold. Even the Devas are ever seeking the opportunity to see this form which is so dear.

Visvarupa form is such -- unique, since an englishman’s visvarupa form will not match Arjuna’s visvarupa vision. Visvarupa vision is in the domain of experience but who is the experiencer? Even while Arjuna envisioned Visvarupa, who really cognized it? What is cognition in you and me? It is Pragnya.

So, Lord says: Also see whatever you desire to see in me. The seeing is always tinged with wish of the seer. As long as Seer is separate from the Seen, there is appearance of Dvaita.


And remember that Arjuna was afraid. Is God scary? It is kala form that is ugram -- scary. Lord said: I am kala. But you yourself said: This param santim sasvatam.

As you say Turiya Self remains Turiya Self --- shivoadvaitam, never affected by its maya so who is suffering the pangs of material nature?

Whose are the pangs of suffering? Who is suffering and who is claiming it? Can you find the one who is lamenting? Do you suffer from pangs in your deep sleep? Do you not exist then?

I don’t think it is fair to single out hk, the whole off Bhakti movement woluld fall in this category of yours, weather srila Prabhupada, who has achieved in his own way, a lot of following and brought Krishna to whole world, weather he has seen the transcendental form, I can not elabrate.what one see or taste can not be explained in words or proved, we can only campare notes. Krishna does say

Well, I beg to differ here. True, that the Turiya is indescribable. So, how does Prabhupada say that He alone knows it and uses language such as rascal, fool etc., for other saintly people?? A god realized man will first accept that ALL IS LORD’s Form.

On the other hand, what is transcendental (Atita) – the Turiya, is described as advaita atma. Isn’t it true that God himself (Varuna) as Mandukya rishi exhorts us to know the advaitam Atma? If one sees/knows it as another then there is neither advaitam nor atma. Another cannot be your Atma. Another cannot be advaitam.

The verse spoken by Krishna represent the truth, what is apparent is param atma being divided, there is no question of I and you being apparent only. The fact is we are eternal, everything that exist is eternal, only difference is this jivas are caught in this material world which has apparent beginning and end and identifying with the material existence one conceives the idea of timeframe.

Many are in the states. But the source of the many is ONE and the truth is beyond time. Thus Mandukya says: What is there in three division of time is OM. And whatever beyond the time is also OM.

If I as Atanu or a Jiva is eternally separate from Param Atma then I can never have any chance. This is not sanatana dharma position. There is a promise of no-return or there is a promise of enjoyment of karma fruits in heaven and then a return. Also, if jivas are eternal and different from Param Atma then the verse that ‘Param Atma appears divided in bodies but is ONE’ is falsified.

-------The truth is beyond explanation only self-realization can reveal what is the essence that lies beyond the material manifestation. We all are conscious being aware of this existence, param atma is never deluded but we are, we can not become that we are not.

It is a beautiful statement: We all are conscious being aware of this existence, param atma is never deluded but we are, we can not become that we are not.

Yes, you said: self-realization can reveal what is the essence that lies beyond the material manifestation. The Self is advaitam atma. When one realizes it as I and they and He, one has lost the atma as well as the Advaita. One cannot know Advaita remaining a second to it.

It is true that we have never become anything that we are not. Atma cannot ever become non-atma and vice versa. So called 'we' cannot be separate from Brahman either, since then no one can cognise 'we' as Brahamn is Pragnya. Anything outside Brahman simply does not exist. So, being within Brahman how can something become non-atman?

It is a different matter that the advaita atma has unlimited forms with different functions and different powers. The Supreme Lord is manifested with Supreme functions and supreme powers. But He has the same atma as anyone else. On the other hand, Param Parastad is beyond the defintion of supreme. It remains auspicious ever and hence is called Sada Shiva.



Regards,

Om Namah Shivayya

[Znanna]

What a beautiful post, thanks Atanu.





Namaste,
ZN

[atanu]

What a beautiful post, thanks Atanu.



Namaste,
ZN

Namaste Znanna,

I feel glad that you liked the post. I take it as an approval from Mother, conveyed through you.

Thanks, Regards.

Namaste

Om Namah Shiva Om Namah Shiv
Om Namah Aswin -- Hara Parvati.
Om Namah Aswin -- who protect and nurture Indra and Vishnu.

Om

[atanu]

Namaste Ganesh Prasad Ji,
------
I realize that every act of pain is an act of grace of God, to push the mind to the Self. ------

Om Namah Shivayya

And today, I realize that it is the eternal power play between Shiva and Parvati.

Parvati wants to bath in her own beauty. Lord wants Her attention--- so some pain ensues. But it is so sweet. Lover's tiff.

Om Namah Shivayya

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Atanu ji

Sorry to have kept you waiting for a reply we may restart if you wish, I also agree to most of your views or at least appreciate it

I agree to most of your views except a few differences, which we may agree to keep for future consideration. Diversity arising out of Pragnya is the nature.

Differences are healthy and it will persist that is the nature of individual being.
Please define Pragnya and its nature and the reason for diversity arising out it.

Only a handful can enter Turiya, since that will require absence of ego desires. Even deep sleep happens when there is no desire. Turiya cannot be attained unless individuality and its desires are not discarded as false. What do we do? Worship the highest form of Turiya – the SARVESVARA who is Lord Pragnya – SARVASYA YONI. The highest form is desireless. Worshiping Him, being at his feet, all desires are fulfilled and desires are attenuated. For 99% jivas this is true.

manusyanam sahasresu
kascid yatati siddhaye
yatatam api siddhanam
kascin mam vetti tattvatah

Scarcely one out of thousands of persons strives for perfection of Self-realization. Scarcely any one of the striving, or even the perfected persons, truly understands Me. (7.03)



Having entered the turiya for those handful what would be their position vis the supreme Brahman?
Desires are unlimited from where does this desires sprout?
(Turiya – the SARVESVARA who is Lord Pragnya – SARVASYA YONI.) These are all impersonal definition where else Worshiping Him, being at his feet, I can relate and have a meaningful relationship.

Every time a painful thought/experience surfaces, I have enquired who is pained? I have not found the ‘Atanu’ that feels the pain. Atanu is just a name which thinks that it is separate from the Universe and is pained when the world is perceived to be kicking Atanu.

we may get lost in the words or name which certainly has no value other then identification but the person that is conscious, the individual living being, certainly feels the pain and pleasure however temporary it may be, brought upon due to ignorance of the real identity of the jivatma, the perceiver.

I realize that every act of pain is an act of grace of God, to push the mind to the Self. Lord says: Do not desire anya devata, desire only Me. I am the Self. And the Self is indeed defined as shivo advaita atma. As per my understanding, knowing the advaita atma as another being is impossible. Shri Krishna also teaches the same but many do not recognize it. Lord says: I am the Self. Abide in ME. Then He says: Yogis who abide ceaselessly in Me, I am in him and He is in ME. In such a case there is no scope of any boundary here.

above statement at least for me is very confusing if I were to understand your line of thinking i.e. advaita.
These are full of devaita statements for instance it is some one else feeling the pain that seeks the grace of god, abide in me is an instruction to some one else.

And yet beings, in reality, do not remain in Me. Look at the power of My divine mystery. Though the sustainer and creator of all beings, I do not remain in them. (9.05)

Consider that all beings remain in Me as the mighty wind, moving everywhere, eternally remains in space. (9.06)

There are no boundaries, that which is eternal eko advaita, contains everything within, you me and everyone else that which is conscious are definitely here, and that which exists never cease to be Krishna say very clearly.
In this bhovtic sansar(material word) which is only a tiny part compared to the spiritual word, we desire various things for our happiness but we are constantly disappointed because this world is of temporary nature the soul which is eternal can never be satisfied by it, the result of looking in wrong direction.


purusah sa parah partha
bhaktya labhyas tv ananyaya
yasyantah-sthani bhutani
yena sarvam idam tatam

This Supreme abode, O Arjuna, is attainable by unswerving devotion to Me within which all beings exist, and by which all this universe is pervaded.(8.22)

Svet. Upanishad

IV-18: When light rises, there is neither day nor night, neither being nor non-being. There is only that Shiva who is imperishable, and who is worthy of being adored by the creator. From Him has proceeded the ancient wisdom (Pragnya).

I do not understand this, more I try less clear it become. Where from the light rises? neither being nor non-being, what do you understand by this? Why would eko Shiva need being adored by creator? There is only eko where is the need for worship, for this to happen there must be other.

The experience while one is in ignorance cannot be true. Ignorance cannot be proven by saying it is Pratayksha that we exist. A mirage is also Pratayksha. Sun rotating around the earth is Pratayksha. That an apple falls is Pratyaksha. But an apple does not fall, it is attracted towards earth. Up-down; today-tommorrow etc. seem pratyaksha but they are just concepts of mind, which is nature of Pragnya.

Ignorance is also a tatva of some kind, one may appreciate light by experiencing darkness

Quote:
So let us not cloth him, not even with maya, he is not saying anywhere that this is his maya form, infact he say he menifests, cotroling the nature, and using maya he is born.
He further explains in verse 9 that one who understands his divyam janma nd karma reaches him.point is his menifestion is divya and not mayic. Also there is no question of him being devoid of form as he explains in verse 11.52
Yes. Rig Veda says that those who know the divine birth of Vishnu know correctly. The birth is from the divine source but only using the potency, which is not a being. So, Dvaita never actually happens. It happens is sahasra sira. And then sahasra sira only teaches us that: ATMA CANNOT BE CUT.

I have not known or heard of birth of Vishnu.
It is very clear that atma can not be cut but then ditintion has always been made for Atma and ParamAtma neither is perished or cut.

Visvarupa form is such -- unique, since an englishman’s visvarupa form will not match Arjuna’s visvarupa vision. Visvarupa vision is in the domain of experience but who is the experiencer? Even while Arjuna envisioned Visvarupa, who really cognized it? What is cognition in you and me? It is Pragnya.

So, Lord says: Also see whatever you desire to see in me. The seeing is always tinged with wish of the seer. As long as Seer is separate from the Seen, there is appearance of Dvaita.


And remember that Arjuna was afraid. Is God scary? It is kala form that is ugram -- scary. Lord said: I am kala. But you yourself said: This param santim sasvatam.

The seer has to be different or else what is there to be seen?
Arjun was perplexed when he saw the visvarup and that was natural too.
The Englishman you and me can only speculate what Arjun saw.

arjuna uvaca
drstvedam manusam rupam
tava saumyam janardana
idanim asmi samvrttah
sa-cetah prakrtim gatah

Arjuna said: O Krishna, seeing this gentle human form of Yours, I have now become composed and I am normal again. (11.51)

As you say Turiya Self remains Turiya Self --- shivoadvaitam, never affected by its maya so who is suffering the pangs of material nature?
Whose are the pangs of suffering? Who is suffering and who is claiming it? Can you find the one who is lamenting? Do you suffer from pangs in your deep sleep? Do you not exist then?

In deep sleep man knows no pain here there is no awareness a temporary amnesia but as the copiousness begins to wake the nightmare begins, we exist in all this state we are not different and our problem do not disappear in any of this different states.

Well, I beg to differ here. True, that the Turiya is indescribable. So, how does Prabhupada say that He alone knows it and uses language such as rascal, fool etc., for other saintly people?? A god realized man will first accept that ALL IS LORD’s Form.

I can not defend this but then I am not his follower I but do have some gratitude to his accomplishment and the spread of Hare Krishna Mantra.

On the other hand, what is transcendental (Atita) – the Turiya, is described as advaita atma. Isn’t it true that God himself (Varuna) as Mandukya rishi exhorts us to know the advaitam Atma? If one sees/knows it as another then there is neither advaitam nor atma. Another cannot be your Atma. Another cannot be advaitam.

This is yours and mine upadhi, you are looking through advaita glasses I through don’t know what (fog) may be one day I will be granted by his Krupa so that I can see clearly.

It is true that we have never become anything that we are not. Atma cannot ever become non-atma and vice versa. So called 'we' cannot be separate from Brahman either, since then no one can cognise 'we' as Brahamn is Pragnya. Anything outside Brahman simply does not exist. So, being within Brahman how can something become non-atman?

It is a different matter that the advaita atma has unlimited forms with different functions and different powers. The Supreme Lord is manifested with Supreme functions and supreme powers. But He has the same atma as anyone else. On the other hand, Param Parastad is beyond the defintion of supreme. It remains auspicious ever and hence is called Sada Shiva.



Regards,

Om Namah Shivayya

We have different take and understanding or may be not, we all know energy is never destroyed and there is different source type of energy, perhaps atma and parmatma is like that same but different, I don’t know weather you heard this bhajan aub sompdiya is jivan ko
MujMe tujMe bas bhed yahi me nar hun tum Narayan ho

I can not see or differentiate between the supreme lord and Sada Shiva


aham sarvasya prabhavo
mattah sarvam pravartate
iti matva bhajante mam
budha bhava-samanvitah

I am the origin of all. Everything emanates from Me. Understanding this, the wise ones worship Me with love and devotion. (10.08)

Jai Shree Krishna

[atanu]

On the other hand, what is transcendental (Atita) – the Turiya, is described as advaita atma. Isn’t it true that God himself (Varuna) as Mandukya rishi exhorts us to know the advaitam Atma? If one sees/knows it as another then there is neither advaitam nor atma. Another cannot be your Atma. Another cannot be advaitam.

Pranam Ganesh Prasad Ji,

A nice and painstaking post you have put in. Thanks.

The above quote is my own that is not product of filtration through many colored glasses but pure logic based on well known non-controversial shruti. And this revelation of logic gains strength from my Guru's teaching as well as well established Advaita knowledge.

That does not deny the phenomenal world but only gives a pointer that the world (with God and jivas) cannot be outside the consciousness, else these would not be known. The Jagat is a pointer to the transcendental being and the transcendental being is the Jagat.

Can one break or partition the consciousness?

The particular divisions that make our Jagat however does not exist in Lord, since He is of the nature of knowledge -- which cannot have partitions. That, I feel, is the true purport of the scripture in question.

This will be easier to understand if we consider wave-matter duality of matter. Yogis see waves whereas we see just the boundaries. When I ask, 'What I am?', I find that I cannot be particularised and cannot be a solid fleshy thing, since the fleshy body is not capable of saying I. Proceeding from there one finds that the I itself is ONE.


And then,

aham sarvasya prabhavo
mattah sarvam pravartate
iti matva bhajante mam
budha bhava-samanvitah

I am the origin of all. Everything emanates from Me. Understanding this, the wise ones worship Me with love and devotion. (10.08)



In short, Lord exists not as "I am Atanu" and "I am Ganeshprasad" but as awareness of I everywhere and in everyone, without any break.


Regards

Om

[atanu]

I have not known or heard of birth of Vishnu.
------

Book 9 RV Book 9 HYMN XCVI. Soma Pavamana


5 Father of holy hymns, Soma flows onward the Father of the earth, Father of heaven: Father of Agni, Surya's generator, the Father who begat Indra and Visnu.


Om

[Krsna Das]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,
The beauty of the Bhagavad-gita is how profound the knowledge (veda) is, and is offered for different levels of understanding. In sutra one (BG 9.1) Krsna tells arjuna that this information He will depart to him is the most secret wisdom (guhyatamam) some say this guhya-tamam, secrets of secrets.

Krsna says in BG 9.2 that this is raja-vidya ( king of knowledge or royal knowledge) and can be practically experienced and understood (pratyaksh avagamam).
What is this profound secret? (BG9.4 -the 2nd line reads)
mat-sthani sarva-bhutani na ca aham tesu-avasthitah.

Sri Krsna is saying All beings are in Me, but I am not in them. another author says it like this: Every being is located (or situated) in Me but I am not situated in them.

What does this say? what does this mean to you? Perhaps looking at the Gita a bit and ponder this , we can have a discussion on this great knowledge.


pranams,

Hare Krsna,

Our understanding of this verse is that one should not conclude that because Lord is omnipresent, so he has lost His personal existence also. To refute such an argument the Lord says, "I am everywhere, and everything is in Me, but still I am aloof."

[Kumar_Das]

Namaskar Yajvan Ji,

You verily have brought out the most important verse of Gita. Counterpoised with another verse where Lord says: 'Yogis see me in everybeing and every being in me', the present verse is truly a matter of meditation.

Please take a lead on this.

Regards,

Om Namah Shivayya

Dear Atanu,

It appears as if you admit that the verse yajvan quoted is dualistic. And you are relying upon this verse you quoted to maintain Advaita. What does that mean? Does the Gita ever contradict itself? It can only be either one right?

Pranams