Namaste
I am sorry your post is full of incorrects. I am showing how :
1 I have not at all said that I have taken Maya as reality. you are guessing my thinking but you have not answered my questions on maya and its relation with Brahman. So far maya is concerned, I do respect and accept what sri Krishna says in Gita . I believe that maya can be crossed only through bhakti marg. you should not guess anything in me which is against bhaktimarg.
2 you say ‘ although maya has no existence’ :: if maya has no existence how can you say brahma + maya = Krishna. what does it mean ? how brahman is related to a “ no existence”. you should answer my questions on maya.
3 I am not saying Krishna is a divine person. I have come to know the very words “ divine person” for the first time. But I think you have to read the verses from chapter IV very cautiously. verse-5 “ O Arjuna, both you and I have passed through many a life .I know all of them, you don’t’”. verse-6 “ I am not bound by cycles of birth and am immortal and Lord of all beings. yet remaining steadfast in my own nature I come into be being through my own divine power ( atmamaya)”. verse-7 “ when ever righteousness declines and unrighteousness thrives, O Arjuna, I incarnate myself”. verse-8 “ For protecting the virtuous for destroying the wicked and for setting righteousness on firm foundations, I am born and reborn age to age”. So it is clear he comes with form . nobody can downgrade or upgrade Krishna . when Krishna comes with form whether he is iswara or Brahman what you will call him you should decide. To me he is sri Krishna sayam bhagavan.
4 please let me know How is Krishna parambrahman to you . parabrahman means nirakar, nirvikara,nirguna ,undefinable ,unthinkable and so on but here Krishna is in war. He is helping Arjuna to win the war. He is trying to boost the morale of Arjuna by describing “ GITA”. you will say these are all illusion. there is no war ,no Arjuna ,no Krishna. I am sorry . BTW may I know which Upanishad tells you that Krishna is parabrahman ? can you please prove by any means other than sri krishna’s own words from Gita that he is nirakar nirvishes nirguna parabrahman ? you always accept one part of the coin to be ultimate truth but the fact is that both the part is ultimate truth. only nirgun nirvishes aspect is ultimate and sagun sakar aspect is not ultimate is a wrong conception. He is ultimate in all aspects. He is supreme He can do anything he wants, you should not put limitation on him. you should not think that being in the form that is being sakar saguna Krishna can not be omnipresent. why do you forget you are talking about the supreme Lord and not about a siddhya babaji. He can at his will do anything with or without form. otherwise what kind of supreme power he is .
5 you say “ iswara is the manifestation of Brahman” If I go with you please tell me how nirvikara nirvishes nirguna Brahman can have manifestation of its own. how can he have a will for manifestation because he is not active. whatever activities we see are done through sagun iswara. so before becoming sagun iswara how can he manifest ? if nirguna nirakar Brahman can have manifestations , what is the need of becoming sagun iswara and then melt away ?
6 you say “ there is no change in Brahman even he takes the sagun rupa (form). I am to ask same question again as to how nirguna nirvikara Brahman can take sagun rupa .so far he is nirguna nirakar nirvikara, he is not supposed to be activated to take any rupa or form. I think first you have to decide how your formless Brahman is. I am reiterating that Krishna himself says many times he is both with form and without form , with guna and without guna and there is no lower and upper reality. It is the follower who is to decide in which way he likes to worship him. he satisfies the follower in which way he ( follower) likes. form formless nirgun sagun are not krishna’s concern. these are the concern of the follower. when nirguna nirvishes he is Brahman and when sagun sakar he is Krishna sayam bhagavan both aspect is as equal as two sides of a coin. those who follow him as without form like you wants to establish they are superior and those who follow him as with form also wants to establish they are superior. but we have to follow what shri Krishna wants us to follow. Gita is regarded as the eyes to look at sri Krishna.
7 “ ignorant does not know supreme nature of Krishna which is called Brahman by vedic pundits” : please see verse 9 of chapter IV –“ He who understands my divine birth and activities in their true nature. O Arjuna, is no longer subject to re birth but comes to me”. In verse 11 of chaper IX he says “ Fools, not knowing my supreme nature as the Lord of creation, despise me in my human form”. People like Sisupal ,Duryodhan etc always took him as a simple human being but Arjuna has witnessed his nature . should you say Arjuna is fool ?
8 krishna lila is separate chapter to understand. if you do not bring it here for discussion , it will be better for all. Krishna lila is not meant for people like you therefore unnecessary comments on such a highly sublime issue is not praise worthy. for your information krishna’s colour is not dark .
9. please respond my points
Bookmarks