BRAHMA IN BHAGAVAT GITA

[devotee]

Namaste Japmala,

You are telling that samkhya does not accept any third agency which is god and its creative power. Again you say prakariti is considered not separate from god. Do you mean that god or isware or sri Krishna and his power maya or prakriti are same ? who is this god ? Is this god brahman ? you should be more specific.

SAmkhya says that Prakriti is an independent and eternal entity. BG and Advaita both say that Prakriti is not different from God / Ishvara / Brahman / Lord Krishna. Lord Krishna in BG is both Saguna and Nirguna Brahman. There is nothing beyond Lord Krishna. MAyA is the power of Brahman or God and that is also called Prakriti. SvetAsvatar Upanishad says so. Brahman or God or Lord Krishna are the same.

I am not clear whether advaita has accepted samkhy’s purush and prakriti and added god to them or advaita accepted only prakriti and termed purusha as god. In the first case there will be three tattvas i.e. god under him purush and prakriti and in the second case there will be two tattvas i.e. god as purush and prakriti. Samkhya does not say that prakriti is the power of purusha. So The relation of prakriti with purush will be decided accordingly.

Purusha of SAmkhya is akin to AtmAn in Advaita. This AtmAn is God/Brahman as per Advaita. Per SAmkhya Purushas are many but per Advaita AtmAn is one. Per BG and Advaita, Prakriti is power of God / Brahman by which He creates, sustains and destroys everything.

There is difference between Advaita and the dualists (like Gaudiya Vaishnavas) on AtmAn. Gaudiya Vaishnavas don't accept Advaita's view that AtmAn is one. They say that God is the all pervading, omnipotent AtmAn (also called ParmAtmAn) and Jeeva is one part of that AtmAn which has got converted into JeevAtma (parinaam vaad) and both JeevAtma and ParamAtmAn are different.

This dispute between Advaitins and the dualists cannot be resolved as it is in their core principle. If you accept my view, you become an Advaitin and if I accept your view, I become a dualist. So, when we are discussing this, we must not have any misconception that I can make you fully agree to my viewpoint or you can make me agree to your viewpoint.

I can only show you that Bhagwad Gita, supports the view that there is Only One AtmAn ( and that is God or Brahman) and that I have showed you in my previous post. Dualists have their own interpretation and they also have their own valid points. We must respect other's viewpoint in spite of our differences.

My understanding is that BG has adopted the purusha and prakriti of samkhya as para and apara prakriti of sri bhagavan sri Krishna. Therefore according to BG there are three tattvas i.e. bhagavan under him his two priakitis as para prakriti or samkhys’s purush and apara prakriti or samkhys’s prakriti. In BG this purush is nothing but the jivatma or jiva or dehi having a deha. I do not agree with your equation that purusha of samkhya = vasudeva of BG . Because vasudeva in BG is sri Krishna swayam who says “ this purusha and prakriti are my para and apara prakriti”. Therefore purusha or atman can not be treated as sri Krishna swayam but they belong to him that’s all.

Advaita also accept that Purusha is one aspect of Lord Krishna / Brahman and Prakriti is another aspect of same Brahman. This has been called Para and Apara Prakriti in BG. There is no dispute between the Advaitins and the dualists on this point. The difference is what you have mentioned in your post and I have also indicated in my post above. Dualists say that JeevAtmA is eternally different from God even though they essentially have the same Tattvas whereas the Advaitins say the Jeeva and God are different only apparently till Jeeva is deluded under the power of MAyA Jeeva loses its individuality and it becomes non-different from Brahman on realisation of its true identity. BG supports this view in verses in which it says that the seekers becomes (one with) Brahman. This has been stated in BG in quite a few places.

My main problem with you is whether creation exists or not. You advaitin maintains that creation is an illusion or projection created by maya or jagat mithya I am not interested in further explanation of the word ‘ mithya”, I like to understand the direct meaning of the word only. sri Krishna very clearly says in verse 10/9 “ it is under my lead that prakriti brings forth all things both animate and inanimate and because of this the world goes revolving”. Verse 13/15 “ entering the earth I sustain all beings and nourish all plants and three --------“. Therefore this jagat or creation is neither illusion nor dream but real so far BG is concerned. Samkhy also does not say that the creation is either illusion or dream. May be samkhy’s purusha and vedantic atman is same but samkhya’s prakriti and vedanta’s maya are quite different in their creativity. Prakriti of samkhya creats and maya of Vedanta does not creat , it projects only. One of the most important components that BG has accepted from samkhya is the evolution of prakriti from unmanifest to all beings and 24 tattvas of the creation theory of samkhya ( verse 5-6/13) which you ignored. With regard to creation and its existence, samkhya and BG do not agree with your illusion theory. Why are you silent on this issue ?

The problem is that this issue cannot be explained without explaining what "Mithya" is. As you have aversion in talking on Mithya, I will ask you some questions which may lead you to the answer which may satisfy you.

Lord Krishna shows his Vishvaroopa in chapter 11. This Vishvaroopa is completely different from what Arjuna was perceiving him before He showed Arjuna His Vishvaroopa. He also said that Arjuna needs special eyes to see that roopa. With God's grace, Arjuna was able to see Lord Krishna in MahAkaal form which was engaged in destroying all the fighters in Kurukshetra's battle. Right ? The questions are :

i) Did the face and body form of Lord Krishna which was seen by Arjuna before Vishvaroopa-darshan same as what he saw after ?
===> The BG says that both the forms in size, face and actions were completely different.

ii) Lord Krishna was acting as Arjuna's charioteer giving him lecture on Gita's knowledge and at the same time his another form was destroying and devouring all great fighters as MahAkAAl. How come Lord Krishna was acting in completely two different forms in completely different actions ? The Krishna with Arjuna was driving chariot giving lecture whereas same Krishna was engaged in killing all the great fighters in MahAkAl form. From our worldly experience, if one was true, the another one must be illusion because the same entity cannot have completely two different forms engaged in completely two different actions simultaneously. Right ? How as this possible ? When the entire creation was seen within that body of MahAkaal, how Arjuna was seeing himself in Lord Krishna from outside ? Is it possible that you can see yourself in anything when you are seeing that thing from outside ? It can happen only when you are seeing your own image. You can't be present outside a thing and also inside it at the same time. Right ?

I will answer your other questions later on. You may tell your viewpoint on above.

OM

[jopmala]

Namaste devotee

Since you have said that BG is basically knowledge of jnan yoga or as you think that BG is for imparting jnan erc etc. if you accept that the verses of BG are coming directly from sagun sakar savisesh sri Krishna swayam and not from any illusionary figure, I would like to know from you the following :

Verse i4/8 “ I am easily attained by a yogin who is disciplined and constantly meditates( smaranam) on ME ( sagun sakar sri krishna) i.e. thinking of nothing else” ( annanyachetah satatam yo mam smarati nityashah). Being a believer of nirgun nirakar Brahman, how can Advaitin do it and can they constantly (for nityashah) do it even after attaining jnan ?

Verse 22/8 “ the supreme in whom all other beings dwell and who pervades this universe ( idam sarvam) can be attained by single minded devotion or anannya bhakti”. Being a non believer in “ sarvam idam” or this unverse whom you call a illusion created by maya how advaitin practice this anannya bhakti ? what is the concept of anannya bhakti towards self by self ?

Verse 26/9 “ what ever man gives ME in true devotion whether a leaf, a flower, a fruit or water, I accept that gift of love from the bhakta”. The advaitin neither believe in the existence of sagun Brahman so there is no question of accepting any thing from them nor this is applicable to nirguna nirakar Brahman. How do you explain this verse ?

Verse 27/9 “ whatever you do ,eat or give, whaever you sacrifices etc do that as an offering unto ME”. Can advaitin offer anything to nirgun nirakar Brahman who is the only ultimate reality according to them.

Verse 29/9 “ those who worship ME devotedly dwell in ME and I too dwel in them”. Is this applicable to advaitin since nirgun nirakar Brahman can not dwell anywhere.

Verse 34/9 “ fill your mind with ME, be MY devotee, worship ME and bow down to ME. Thus steadfastly uniting your heart with ME alone and making ME your goal, you shall come to ME” can this verse be applicable to beliver of nirgun nirakar Brahman ? how can advaitin bow down to nirgun nirakar Brahman ? this is bhagavad saranagati , part of bhakti yoga.

Verse 9/10 “ their mind is centred in ME, their lives are dedicated to ME, teaching each other and all the time talking about ME, they are full of happiness and joy”. Can the advaitin all the time talk about nirguna nirakar Brahman who have no activities to talk at all ?

verse 8/12 “fix your mind on ME alone, rest your reason ( buddhi) in ME, you shall definitely dwell in ME” . can you do it in nirgun nirakar Brahman ?

you say bhakti is the first step towards attaining jnan but after dedicating verses 51-53/18 to Brahman , the ultimate goal of knowledge, sri Krishna in verse 54/18 says “ being one with Brahman, he attains supreme devotion unto ME”. Please remember this ‘ME” is sagun sakar sri Krishna swayam. So a jnani can attain supreme devotion only after he reaches in the state of “being one with Brahman". Is being one with Brahman the first step towards attaining jnan ?

verse 55/18 “through such devotion, he or jnani comes to know ME who and how much I am and in MY reality and principles of MY being and having known ME in truth , he forthwith enters into ME”. So how can you think that by attaining jnan you will get united with Brahman ignoring bhakti ?

verse 65/18 “ become MY minded, MY lover and adorer, a sacrificer to ME, bow yourself to ME, to ME you shall come. This is MY pledge and promise to you”. Now devoteeji tell me how can you do all this to nirgun nirakar Brahman ?

verse 66/18 “abandon all dharmas and take refuge in ME alone “. Can a advaitin take refuge in nirgun nirakar Brahman ?

you only read verse 17/7 which says “ I an exceedingly dear to jnani and he to ME”. Being a believer of nirguna nirakar Brahman, can you become “ nityayukta ekbhaktirvishisyate” ? I do not think this is a kind of bhakti which you practice since your bhakti practice ends at attainaing jnan. Can you explain this ?

I would you to read verse 29/9 where sri krishna says “I am alike to all beings. Nobody is hateful or dear to ME. But those who worship ME devotedly ( ye tu man bhakta bhajanti) dwell in ME and I too dwell in them”

you are believer of nirgun nirakar brahman where you can neither take refuge nor worship with love but sri Krishna says in verse 14/7 and 26/14 says that without seeking refuge in HIM ( sagun sakar sri Krishna) alone and without worshiping HIM ( sagun sakar sri Krishna) with unfaltering love, one can not transcend maya. Can you explain these verses from advaitik POV ?

The advaitins are believer of nirguna nirakar Brahman but they keep worshiping the images of sagun sakar Brahman like pictures of Krishna Vishnu Ram Durga etc with their firm belief that Brahman has no form and qualities. Advaitins do believe that these personalities do not exist at all and whatever form of them is seen is nothing but a projection or illusion created by maya. Then , my question to you is Why the advaitins do worship and chant the name of these illusory sagun Brahman. If it is for purification of mind or developing concentration capacity , they can use any pictures even photo of their ownself also being aham brahmashmi or shiva worship shiva . I do not understand which intellect or reasoning allow you to worship an illusory image . Is this an exercise of showing some acts of dharma being done to attract common people who has less intellect and reasoning then advaitin ? I want to know the reason behind this exercise.

[jopmala]

Namaste devotee

First , I have already pointed out the differences between samkhya and advaita on BG which you disagree.no further comment.

what do you mean by "sri krishna and his prakriti are same in BG" in what respect are they same. . this is new interpretation which is against BG. please quote the verse.
if according you sri krishna is both sagun and nirgun brahman then why do you keep sagun sri krishna in vyavaharika level within the reach of maya and nirgun sri krishna in parmarthika level byond the reach of maya. why sagun krishna is not ultimate reality and nirgun sri krishna is so. why such discrimination between two aspects of same krishna ?
.
On viswarupa darshan , I would like to say that according to me this act of viswarupa darshan can not be compared with any wordly experience. Here two things involve , first sri krishna’s divine power to creat or his “yogam aishvaram” ( verse 8/11) and secondly, special eye given to Arjune. Both of them are beyond our experience or expression or intellect.

Sri Krishna being a almighty all powerful may do anything which is beyond our understanding.

Here ,if you are indicating one form is with Arjune as sarathi and another form which is mahakal in somewhere else then what is said in verse 7/11 “ mam dehe” and verse 13/11 “ devadevasya sharire” and 15/11 “ tava dege sarvab” and verse 16/11 “ tvam sarvatah pasyami” and verse 17/11 “ tvam samantad”.

In verse 51/11 “ manusam rupam” which indicates that so long sri Krishna was not in human form. Therefore if you mean that two separate form in two different spot that will not be correct. Here every thing happens in same form and in same spot. Please do not forget this all happen due to HIS “ atmayogat” in verse 47/11. So this episode of viswa rupa darshan is understandable only through sri krishna’s krupa otherwise applying human reasoning to such an episode which takes place due to aisvarika yoga of sri Krishna will not be wise. This my view .

[devotee]

Namaste Japmala,

What do you mean by "sri krishna and his prakriti are same in BG" in what respect are they same. . this is new interpretation which is against BG. please quote the verse.

Please read my post again. I didn't say that. What I said or wanted to say is that Prakriti is not an independent entity separate from Lord Krishna whereas SAmkhya believes in independent existence of Prakriti. It is a part of Him which He calls s apara Prakriti.

if according you sri krishna is both sagun and nirgun brahman then why do you keep sagun sri krishna in vyavaharika level within the reach of maya and nirgun sri krishna in parmarthika level byond the reach of maya. why sagun krishna is not ultimate reality and nirgun sri krishna is so. why such discrimination between two aspects of same krishna ?

Let me, first of all, tell you one thing. This Nirguna Brahman / Saguna Brahman / MAyA / Mithya / Reality of the world etc. ===> please don't get bogged down with all these concepts which are difficult to understand because of our attachment to body-mind entity. Even if I accept your proposition that World is real or there is no Nirguna Brahman but only Saguna Brahman ... how does it matter ? The Reality will remain what it is. If God is only Saguna, if this world is Real ... it will remain so. My understanding is not going to change what it is.

In all these technicalities, you are missing very important points of Advaita SAdhanA :

You can have whatever belief you want to have, it doesn't matter so much except that your spiritual progress will be delayed and slow. You follow the JnAn yoga path as described in Bhagwad Gita. Lord Krishna asks in BG :

a) To detach oneself from subjects of sense organs and mind. Do it.
b) To detach oneself from attachment of this world. Do it.
c) To see every being with equanimity. Do it.
d) Remember that God resides in all beings and everywhere in His unmanifest form. Attune yourself to that and try to see God in every being and everywhere. Always keep your mind on God.
e) Visualise that it is Prakriti who does everything and you are not the doer.


..... and finally,

f) meditate on Self as has been described in Chapter 6.

=====> The Reality will Itself reveal to one who does as has been stated above. When the Reality reveals, then it would become clear whether Advaita's teachings are right or wrong. Meditation itself will lead you to the Reality as It is.

Advaita SAdhana is not just theory. It doesn't matter what you believe. Don't accept anything unless you get Pratyaksha PramANa. When the Reality reveals Itself, then everything will be clear. So, at least, you must agree that our path is not wrong and that it is as advocated by Lord Krishna in Bhagwad Gita.

On viswarupa darshan , I would like to say that according to me this act of viswarupa darshan can not be compared with any wordly experience. Here two things involve , first sri krishna’s divine power to creat or his “yogam aishvaram” ( verse 8/11) and secondly, special eye given to Arjune. Both of them are beyond our experience or expression or intellect.

Sri Krishna being a almighty all powerful may do anything which is beyond our understanding.

Here ,if you are indicating one form is with Arjune as sarathi and another form which is mahakal in somewhere else then what is said in verse 7/11 “ mam dehe” and verse 13/11 “ devadevasya sharire” and 15/11 “ tava dege sarvab” and verse 16/11 “ tvam sarvatah pasyami” and verse 17/11 “ tvam samantad”.

In verse 51/11 “ manusam rupam” which indicates that so long sri Krishna was not in human form. Therefore if you mean that two separate form in two different spot that will not be correct. Here every thing happens in same form and in same spot. Please do not forget this all happen due to HIS “ atmayogat” in verse 47/11. So this episode of viswa rupa darshan is understandable only through sri krishna’s krupa otherwise applying human reasoning to such an episode which takes place due to aisvarika yoga of sri Krishna will not be wise. This my view .

See, Arjuna was able to "see" God's Vishvaroopa with His grace. Does it mean that only at that moment Lord Krishna changed Himself from a human being to Vishvaroopa ? Or He already had a Vishvaroopa and it was not visible to Arjuna with his worldly eyes ? When Krishna was in Charioteer form, was the world inside Him or outside Him ?

When Arjuna saw all fighters going into the mouth of Lord Krishna, the war had not even begun. So, what was all that was seen by Arjuna ? Was it Real or an Illusion ?

Again, in Lord Krishna's the whole universe is always there. Right ? Mother YashodA saw the whole universe inside his mouth. When mother YashodA saw the universe inside Lord Krishna's mouth, what had happened to the world where Child Krishna or Mother YashodA was ? Was Mother YashodA inside the universe which was in the mouth of Krishna or was she in the outside world where the child Krishna was ? How was mother YashodA outside Lord Krishna's mouth and also inside His mouth at the same time ? Is it possible logically ?

.... I have seen your questions in your earlier post. I will take some time to respond on them due to my very busy schedule.

OM

[devotee]

Namaste Japmala,

Verse i4/8 “ I am easily attained by a yogin who is disciplined and constantly meditates( smaranam) on ME ( sagun sakar sri krishna) i.e. thinking of nothing else” ( annanyachetah satatam yo mam smarati nityashah). Being a believer of nirgun nirakar Brahman, how can Advaitin do it and can they constantly (for nityashah) do it even after attaining jnan ?

1. First of all, 'ME' is not Saguna Sakar Sri Krishna. You have interpreted it like that but Lord Krishna in Bhagwad Gita means "Brahman" for Advaitins. Correct view of Brahman is attained when you are able to see Brahman with His both aspects.
2. An Advaitin always thinks of God as for him there is nothing except God everywhere and in every being. In fact, a Saguna Bhakta thinks of God in a temple or at best in his mind when he chants his bhajan etc. but JnAni sees Him everywhere ... even in those places and time where and when a common seeker can't imagine.
3. What is this JnAn ? This JnAn is direct perception of the Truth that Brahman alone exists and that individuality is just an illusion. JnAni realises that he is one with Brahman. So, when he becomes one with Brahman, what is the need of anything to be done further ?

Verse 22/8 “ the supreme in whom all other beings dwell and who pervades this universe ( idam sarvam) can be attained by single minded devotion or anannya bhakti”.
Being a non believer in “ sarvam idam” or this unverse whom you call a illusion created by maya how advaitin practice this anannya bhakti ? what is the concept of anannya bhakti towards self by self ?

How did you come to the conclusion that Advaitins are non-believers in "Sarvam Idam" ? Please ... please ... the universe is not an illusion w.r.t. to your or any human's point of reference. It is an illusion from the reference point of the Absolute. As long as I perceive myself as a human being i.e. a body-mind entity, this world is as real to me as I am or as you are !

Moreover, please tell me how a Saguna Saakaar can pervade the entire universe ? No Saakaar being or a thing can pervade the entire universe which is limitless ! If you think that Lord Krishna's body is real and He resides in that body alone ... how can He pervade the universe ? This is a logical impossibility !

Verse 26/9 “ what ever man gives ME in true devotion whether a leaf, a flower, a fruit or water, I accept that gift of love from the bhakta”. The advaitin neither believe in the existence of sagun Brahman so there is no question of accepting any thing from them nor this is applicable to nirguna nirakar Brahman. How do you explain this verse ?

Advaitins fully believe in existence of Saguna Brahman within our plane of reference otherwise he will not believe in his own existence. However, Saguna Brahman's form and name are not-real but projected by MAyA. Please tell me this :

a) Lord Krishna was born in Mahabharata time when there was no camera and no painting of Lord Krishna has been found of that period who depicts how Lord Krishna looked. If you agree with that, how do we make Lord Krishna's murti or picture ? How do we know that Lord Krishna looked exactly the way the painting or Murti is made ? Moreover, please see different pictures / murtis of Lord Krishna. Do they all look exactly the same ? They are all different and we just accept those murtis / pictures as Krishna and it works for us just fine. How does an imagined picture /Murti of Krishna works for a Bhakta ?

Smt RAdhA Rani whom we accept as her divine love, is not a historical figure. She nowhere is mentioned in any of the scriptures of Mahabharata time. In my opinion, there was no Radha Rani in physical form. Her character was a creation of Jaideva, the poet from Puri and Raja Ravi Verma, the painter and the story was spread first of all by Nimbarka. Again, no one has seen her and no one has seen how Radha and Krishna played together. Still, you create the whole love-scene episode in detail ? .... Not only that, in some sects of Gaudia Vaishnavas, RAdhA is considered Poorna Brahman ! So, when Vaishnavas accept so-called imaginary entity as Poorna Brahman ... it is OK ?

However, only Advaitins see no defect in the above (I repeat, only the Advaitins will find no defect in it). Because it hardly matters if RAdhA ever existed in physical form. The strong belief of people creates this form and name as real as Lord Krishna. How ? Mudgal Upanishad tells us : He (God) became what He was worshiped as.

Verse 27/9 “ whatever you do ,eat or give, whaever you sacrifices etc do that as an offering unto ME”. Can advaitin offer anything to nirgun nirakar Brahman who is the only ultimate reality according to them.

Yes. .. and we do offer that ! Saguna too exists in our plane of existence and it is as real as we are. The thing is that neither we, nor this world and nor the Saguna Brahman are the ultimate Reality. Saguna Brahman is none but Nirguna Brahman alone who acquires form and name with the help of His own MAyic powers.

Verse 29/9 “ those who worship ME devotedly dwell in ME and I too dwel in them”. Is this applicable to advaitin since nirgun nirakar Brahman can not dwell anywhere.

You didn't get it correctly. A Saguna Brahman in form can never reside in any being. It is an impossibility. If Saguna Brahman is with a definite form, how can He ever reside in all beings ? God resides in all beings only as Nirguna Brahman which is the ultimate reality and substratum of everything and every being. That is why Lord Krishna says :

"MayA tatam idam sarvam Jagat avyaktamurtinA". This whole universe is pervaded by Me in my unmanifest form.

Verse 34/9 “ fill your mind with ME, be MY devotee, worship ME and bow down to ME. Thus steadfastly uniting your heart with ME alone and making ME your goal, you shall come to ME” can this verse be applicable to believer of nirgun nirakar Brahman ? how can advaitin bow down to nirgun nirakar Brahman ? this is bhagavad saranagati , part of bhakti yoga.

Yes, as I have replied earlier. This is easier for the Adavitins than seeker of any other path. Please read my answer above.

Verse 9/10 “ their mind is centred in ME, their lives are dedicated to ME, teaching each other and all the time talking about ME, they are full of happiness and joy”. Can the advaitin all the time talk about nirguna nirakar Brahman who have no activities to talk at all ?

This is done in a different way by the Advaitins. We seek the God which is veiled under MAyA and to that extent discuss issues and ways that can lead us to God/Brahman.

verse 8/12 “fix your mind on ME alone, rest your reason ( buddhi) in ME, you shall definitely dwell in ME” . can you do it in nirgun nirakar Brahman ?

I think that this can be done by an Advaitin only. You are too fixated to Saguna-Nirguna issue and therefore, you can't see God everywhere and therefore , "You see God in something and not in others and therefore can't have your mind fixed on God." For us, everything and every being is God ... so our mind gets fixed on Him naturally and easily.

you say bhakti is the first step towards attaining jnan but after dedicating verses 51-53/18 to Brahman , the ultimate goal of knowledge, sri Krishna in verse 54/18 says “ being one with Brahman, he attains supreme devotion unto ME”. Please remember this ‘ME” is sagun sakar sri Krishna swayam. So a jnani can attain supreme devotion only after he reaches in the state of “being one with Brahman". Is being one with Brahman the first step towards attaining jnan ?

Translating "ME" is as "Saguna Brahman" is utterly wrong. By doing this, you are limiting God to a definite form, name and attributes and that actually, is not-God. Advaitins see God beyond all such concepts. This whole universe is so vast and huge that we cannot even bring that vastness into a human mind. God pervades the entire universe, in all smallest particles of this universe, in all beings, the entire limitless space ... it is all pervaded by Him in his unmanifest form and you say that He only saguna/Saakaar ? God cannot be bound to the limits of our mind. It is a great folly to even think like that.

When Lord Krishna was in form, then also simultaneously He pervaded the entire universe through and through ... It was even when He was not born, even when He was a just a toddler weighing just a few pounds, even when He grew up in that body and even when He left his body and that body was cremated by Arjuna in the forest. How can you limit Him to only Saguna roopa ? Just try to visualise the whole universe including you and me ... pervaded through and through by Hid unmanifest form ... it is so thrilling !!

Being One with Brahman and attaining ParA-bhakti ( mark it, it is ParA-bhakti and not simple Bhakti that we can understand) ... is one and the same thing. It is incorrect to think that ParA-bhakti comes after JnAna ... it happens simultaneously. So, no need to differentiate and see the time-lag between being One with Brahman and attaining ParA-bhakti of God.

verse 55/18 “through such devotion, he or jnani comes to know ME who and how much I am and in MY reality and principles of MY being and having known ME in truth , he forthwith enters into ME”. So how can you think that by attaining jnan you will get united with Brahman ignoring bhakti ?

As I told you that "being one with Brahman and attaining ParA-bhakti" are not different phenomena. This verse 55 of chapter 18 says that the JnAni on attaining that state, knows Brahman as He really is ( i.e. no one else knows Him as He really is) and enters into him instantaneously. Please mark the word used by God in the verse : "tadanantaram" meaning immediately i.e. without any delay.

verse 65/18 “ become MY minded, MY lover and adorer, a sacrificer to ME, bow yourself to ME, to ME you shall come. This is MY pledge and promise to you”. Now devoteeji tell me how can you do all this to nirgun nirakar Brahman ?

This question cannot arise in an Advaitic mind. What you saying shows that you think that there are two Brahman : One is Saguna and another is Nirguna ! That is ridiculous. There is One Brahman and He Himself is Saguna and also Nirguna. In fact, nothing exists except Brahman. So, if you are bowing to a Saguna Brahman or a Nirguna Brahman, whether you are devoted to one form or the formless ... you are bowing to the same Brahman. The only shortcoming in a Saguna Bhakta is that he tries to see God only in Saguna Roopa and thus denies his all-pervading Nirguna roopa. So, you don't accept God as He is. And that is why for knowing Him as He is .. you must follow the JnAn Yoga as taught by Lord Krishna in Verses 51-53 and as promised/clarified by Him, then alone you can know Him as He really is.

verse 66/18 “abandon all dharmas and take refuge in ME alone “. Can a advaitin take refuge in nirgun nirakar Brahman ?

Yes. Why not ?

you only read verse 17/7 which says “ I an exceedingly dear to jnani and he to ME”. Being a believer of nirguna nirakar Brahman, can you become “ nityayukta ekbhaktirvishisyate” ? I do not think this is a kind of bhakti which you practice since your bhakti practice ends at attainaing jnan. Can you explain this ?

Highest state of devotion is "attaining the state of being One with Brahman" ... that alone is JnAn because then only the seeker knows God as He really is. Your assumption that only offering flowers / fruits /sweets, chanting bhajans and dancing is Bhakti then you are grossly mistaken.

I would you to read verse 29/9 where sri krishna says “I am alike to all beings. Nobody is hateful or dear to ME. But those who worship ME devotedly ( ye tu man bhakta bhajanti) dwell in ME and I too dwell in them”

How does it bothers you is not clear.

you are believer of nirgun nirakar brahman where you can neither take refuge nor worship with love but sri Krishna says in verse 14/7 and 26/14 says that without seeking refuge in HIM ( sagun sakar sri Krishna) alone and without worshiping HIM ( sagun sakar sri Krishna) with unfaltering love, one can not transcend maya. Can you explain these verses from advaitik POV ?

All these questions are arising due to lack of understanding of Advaitic philosophy as I have explained above. Most of the questions also arise due to limiting Bhakti to offering flowers / sweets / bhajans etc. Bhakti is more than that and the highest form of Bhakti is attained only when one becomes One with Brahman. There is no place in BG where ParA Bhakti is stated to be achieved by any other means.

BTW, it will be right to tell you that Advaitins too worship Saguna God, offer flowers / Sweets, sing bhajans. Though the feeling of an Advaitin is entirely different from what a Saguna Bhakta thinks at that time. Even when we worship Brahman in Saguna roopa, we never ever forget that His Real state is Nirguna and that He is beyond all forms and attributes. The higher aim of our worship is to attain JnAna by His grace. It is not limited attaining Swarga, or Mukti, or attaining worldly pleasures or seeking a place in His imagined abode as a servant. We seek His grace for attaining the Infinity that we are ... for attaining One-ness with Him as He really is.

That is why one of the bhajans that I sing, prays to God like this :

"O God, shower your grace to me so that you and me will never ever separate. As the wave of sea merges back into sea, I want to merge into you."

The advaitins are believer of nirguna nirakar Brahman but they keep worshiping the images of sagun sakar Brahman like pictures of Krishna Vishnu Ram Durga etc with their firm belief that Brahman has no form and qualities. Advaitins do believe that these personalities do not exist at all and whatever form of them is seen is nothing but a projection or illusion created by maya. Then , my question to you is Why the advaitins do worship and chant the name of these illusory sagun Brahman. If it is for purification of mind or developing concentration capacity , they can use any pictures even photo of their ownself also being aham brahmashmi or shiva worship shiva . I do not understand which intellect or reasoning allow you to worship an illusory image . Is this an exercise of showing some acts of dharma being done to attract common people who has less intellect and reasoning then advaitin ? I want to know the reason behind this exercise.

For understanding the above, you must be clear that a Saguna Brahman exists only to an entity who himself is not in real state. If you think that you are real, Saguna Brahman too is real. You cannot see yourself real and see Saguna Brahman as not-real. You cannot shift the point of reference which you keep doing while asking such questions. This shifting of point of reference is the root-cause of all your confusion. These questions have no place who understand the meaning of the terms they are using and who don't shift the point of reference while discussing this subject.

OM

[devotee]

BTW, ,dear Japmala, I am still awaiting your answers to questions that I asked in my previous post.

OM

[jopmala]

namaste devotee

Like you, I was also very busy. I will be able to respond to very shortly

[jopmala]

Namaste devotee


If you say , “prakriti is not different from God/Iswar/Brahman/Lord Krishna” or “prakariti is considered not separate from god” means “ prakriti is not an independent entity separate from lord Krishna” its ok , although my simple understanding says that the meanings are different.

You are saying “ It is a part of Him which he calls apara prakriti”. Earlier you said “ advaita accepts that purusha is one aspect of Lord Krishna/Brahman and prakriti is another aspect of same Brahman. This are para and apara prakriti in BG”. Both of us accept that apara prakariti is His maya ( although I differ from you about the functions of maya) . plz tell who according to you is the para part of Brahman ? sri Krishna says it is ‘ jiva bhutam’, which means that jiva is His one aspect or part. Problem is ,while you accept these two are His parts and you also accept prakriti as His apara part but you are not ready to accept jiva as His para part. Are you sacrificing the simple understaind in the fire of alligiance to path you follow. ?

The words nirgun sagun maya mithya reality are the least important for me . But these are important while discussing with you. Yes , I said world is real but I never said there is no Nirgun Brahman but only sagun Brahman. I request you not to use word “ god” because we are concerned with Brahman with attributes and without attributes. I do not know exactly what does the word “ god” mean. If you use a word and indicate something else that is not right. You need not have to clarify or analyse the meaning when you say “ Brahman satya” since the meaning coming directly from the word ‘satya’ but as soon as you say “ jagat mithya’ you start clarifying the meaning of the word ‘ mithya’, this or that , why? So its important.

Next,maya . I differ from you about the nature and functions of maya. To you, nirgun Brahman is the only real and maya is power of nirgun Brahman but you define maya as neither real nor unreal. Now you start clarifying what neither real nor unreal is . so advaita says something and means something that suits it and makes things beyond understanding. I think we do not have dearth of words in Sanskrit to give a proper word to a proper/particular thought.

Brahman is not a difficult word to understand. It is important because ,to you, nirgun Brahman is only real and sagun Brahman is an illusion created by maya. Again nirgun Brahman and sagun Brahman are same. By this , you are accepting that real and illusion are same. Is it logical ? . we do not divide Brahman into real and illusion. We believe Brahman is what Brahman wishes. Everyway Brahman is real to us. We can not even think of Brahman to be illusion created by maya. For us , both aspects of Brahman are real and so they are same. This is the difference between our logic and yours.

Thanks for advising me what to follow and how to meditate etc but I am already in the process of following verse 66/18 “ sarva dharma paritajyam mamekam saranam braja”. Therefore I do not need any further advice. I never said your path is wrong but yes I believe that BG has no support for advaita sadhana because the basic concepts of advita philosophy has not even mentioned in the BG.

See, if you bring logic to an episode where marvelous power of sri krisna or “ yogam aishvaram” and divine eyes of Arjune involve , it will be illogical on your part. sri Krishna says in verse 48/11 says “ I can not be seen in this form in this mortal world through the study of the Vedas or practice of rituals sacrifices or severe austerities by anyone else other than you ( Arjune)” . Again in verse 52-53/11 “ this form of mine is very difficult to see. Neither by the study of Vedas nor by penance nor by charity nor by sacrifices can I be seen in this form”. Therefore, The mother yosada’s darshan of universe in child krishna’s mouth and Arjune’s vision of the universal form of sri Krishna is not comparable. Our actions are seen from the POV of Logic and illogic but this is done by sri Krishna swayam whose action is above all logics. Further, for you as an advaita beliver sri Krishna himself is an illusion created by maya and you are trying to justify illusion out of illusion. This is logically impossible.

[jopmala]

Namaste devotee

All the verses I quoted in my earlier post involve some activities towards sri Krishna. Brahman without form name attributes is not fit for such actitivities. Nirgun nirakar aspect is not thinkable. The devotee can not establish relation , can not communicate emotion with the Brahman without form and name. The act of smaranam can not be applied to nirakar nirgun Brahman . you can not take refuge in an undefined unthinkable immovable attributeless Brahman. That’s why sri Krishna in BG verse 5/12 says setting thoughts on unmanifested Brahman is difficult . sri Krishna in BG is partaker of sacrifices or yajnya and spiritual strivings ( bhoktaram yajnatapasam) , the sovereign Lord of the worlds ( sarvalokamaheswaram) and friend of all creatures ( suhridam sarvabhutanam). That’s why “I”, “ME” or “MY” indicates sagun aspect in BG. HE clearly indicates HIS nirgun aspect also where he does so mean. Yes correct view of Brahman is to see Brahman with his both aspects. To us, Brahman is real in both aspects. It is because , he is Brahman. But for advaitin, one aspect is real and another illusion. Since you can not understand how Brahman with form and name can pervade the universe, you directly reject the existence of that aspect of Brahman and call him illusion.

How is your “ sarvam Idam” ? you have mentioned two points of reference. One is absolute point ( real) and another human’s point ( perceived). if the universe is illusion from the absolute’s point that means the absolute has not created this universe. And if the universe is real from human’s point, the question is who has created this universe ? can human creat universe ? So your “ sarvam idam” is an imagination only. If the universe is illusion from absolutes’s point of reference, how can that absolute or Brahman pervade the whole universe in his unmanifest form . you mean Real Brahman pervades illusion universe, is it logical ? you should say that there is no act of pervading by unmanifested Brahman since he is changeless and immovable and devoid of any attributes to act. What we see him pervading the universe is nothing but illusion Brahman pervades illusion universe created by maya.Therefore, by going with your logic, it should be concluded that maya has created this illusion for absolute , in other words, the absolute comes under the influence of maya. On the otherhand, for us human’s point, this universe is real because maya has not created any illusion for us , in other words, we human do not come under the influence of maya. For the Real ( absolute) the universe is illusion and for unreal ( perceived human ) the universe is real. In other words, real to illusion and illusion to real . Is it acceptable that maya creates illusion for the absolute and not for us (perceived human) ? who sees snake on rope ? absolute or perceived human ?

Your statement regarding reality or unreality of krishna’s body just reminds me of verse 11/9 of BG which says “ Fools, not knowing MY supreme nature as the Lord of creation, despise ME in MY human form”. Further, verse 9/4 says that we should understand HIS divine birth and activities in their true nature.

Your statement that sagun Brahman is none but Nirgun Brahman alone who acquires name and form is wrong from the point of view of scriptures because nirgun brahman is changeless and immovable by definition , then how could he acquire any form or name ? It is also illigocal to attach a power “MAYA” to the nirgun brahman . It is new concept to me what you call “unmanifest form” Be logical please. Unmanifest itself does mean without form. If we go by your theory, the conclusion is that nirgun Brahman never becomes sagun since it is changeless but what we see as sagun Brahman is nothing but an illusion created by maya. You should directly and clearly say that the concept of sagun Brahman is an illusion in your philosophy.

From your statement “ the thing is that neither we, nor this world and nor the sagun brahman are the ultimate reality” , it is evident that “we”, “ this world” and “ sagun Brahman” are nothing but illusion created by maya. You know , I see you all advaitin in the world of desert and being so thirsty you engage yourself in search of water to quench your thurst but unfortunately in the desert there is no real water and you all are running after “Miraze” an illusory water that can not satisfy your thurst. If you wait for someo one to rescue you from desert, that guru will also be a illusion not real. You yourself is perceived entity, you live in perceived world, you worship perceived Brahman and your guru is also a perceicved entity. Therefore the theory of advaita is all about perception/illusion only. The only real that is nirgun nirakar Brahman can no be thought, defined, experienced, seen, talked about.

Attaining Brahman ,the ultimate goal of jnan is the final destination of jnani ( Brahman apnoti jnanasya para nistha) and this is what being one with Brahman or brahman apnoti ( verse 50/18). Then verse 54/18 says being one with Brahman , jnani attains supreme devotion unto HIM ( brahmabhutah param madbhaktim labhate) then verse 55/18 says through such devotion or param bhakti, he comes to know ME ( yavan yah asmi tattvatah abhijanati). Having known ME in truth ,he forthwith enters into ME ( tatah mam tattvata jnata tadanantaram vishate) please mark tatah first then tadanantaram. So step by step. First attain Brahman then attain supreme devotion unto sri Krishna then comes to know sri krishna tattvata and then enter into HIM. Supreme devdotion or Param bhakti can only be attained after being one with brahma. Ultimately without bhakti jnani can not enter into Brahman. Verses are very clear.

It is for you advaitin only that two aspects of Brahman makes two different Brahman. One aspect is real and another an illusion. So how can you treat real and illusion equally ? you are biased towards nirgun aspect which only real for you . Can you bow down to a illusion Brahman or can you bow down to forless real Brahman ? whatever activities you do before sagun Brahman, everything goes invain since you strongly believe that sagun sakar Brahman is nothing but an illusion created by maya. Illusion can not accept your offerings, can not bestow grace on you ,can not help you in any way. Illusion is mental phenomenon means imagination. But sagun Brahman is not an mental phenomenon. Do you know the greatest sadhak whom you call advaitin Sri Ram Krishna Dev used to have talks with Mata Kali ? He saw mata standing before him and even ate Prasad from Kali’s own hand. Ram Krishna never mentioned that he talked with any illusion or ate illusory Prasad in the hands of an illusion. But when you worship in sagun roop you never ever forget that HE is an illusion not real. You want to attain jnan by worshipping an illusion.

[jopmala]

Finally, do not accuse me of shiftingI the point of discussion. You bring new new interpretation which arises new questions. This time you have brought Radha. But I am least interested to discuss Radha tattva with you. I suggest you to smell tulsi daily that may make you able to know the true personality of Radha . we the follower of bhakti marge believe in both aspects of Brahman and we believe that both aspects of Brahman are real. You always criticize bhaktivadi as worshiper of murthi etc. though personally I do not worship Krishna in any murthi still I shall recommend you to read the literatures of Swami Vivekananda and you will find why it is necessary to have a imagined murthi/pictures. Before commenting on what is bhakti practiced by bhaktas ( offering flowers/fruits/sweets, chanting bhajans and dancing) please go through the biographies of great bhaktas India has ever seen. That will teach you some lessons on bhakti. I know very well what you see in everywhere in every being. It is nothing but an illusion since the Brahman you follow can not move can not change can not manifest can not pervade and can not be seen . when everything is illusion in advaita, where do you find karma ? karma is coming out of maya that means karma is also an illusion. Whom you call Krishna is a form and name. the Brahman without form does not have any name. whom you meditate is not brhman without form and name since Brahman without form can not even be thought. Regarding krishna’s murthi or pictures, I have to say that since HE incarnates as krishna in this earth, HE certainly bears a human like appearance. In due course of time due to extreme love towards HIM, bhaktas might have imagined different images only to see HIM more and more beauriful and lovable. This is glorification of sri Krishna and there is nothing wrong in it. Even we using photoshop make our own appearance more glowing and more charming which is not in actual.

Para bhakti is meant for jnani only. Bhaktas does not need para bhakti. For bhakta , sri Krishna is so kind and so near that what ever bhakta gives HIM whether a leaf, a flower, a fruit or water, HE accepts that gift of love from the bhaktas.

You have asked me how sagun sakar can pervade the entire universe and you yourself replied that when Lord Krishna was in form then also simultaneously He pervaded the entire universe through and through. Now I am giving the reply. See, first of all, Brahman is param tattva and we the individual jiva has limited understanding to know how Brahman works . we are not supposed to analyse the actions of brahman on logic because HE is brahman , HE is above all logic and illogic. But in the BG verses 6/4, 25/7, 5/9, 7/10 and 8/11 say that sri Krishna has special power through which HE can do anything HE wants. Through this special power, HE incarnates HIMSELF, HE can conceals HIS own nature, HE can remain outside the beings though sustaining them. With this special power HE has shown Arjune the visvaroopa. Sri Krishna says “he who knows the yogic power of MINE ,becomes united with ME”. Therefore , I advise you to let sri Krishna decide how HE can pervade the universe with form or without form. We are not supposed to comment on whether HIS actions are possible or impossible. The words like possible/impossible or logical/illogical matter us , human. These words have no place in the dictioney of sri Krishna. If you say something is impossible being sagun sakar, that will be a limitation which is not applicable to swayam bhagavan sri Krishna. HE can destroy this world in one single blow. Can you believe it ? will you find any logic ?

If you set the terms and conditions for the existence of Brahman, that will be futile. You say “If I think I am real then only sagun Brahman too is real” and in another para you say “ nirguna Brahman alone acquires form and name with the help of his power maya” , which one is correct statement ? if Brahman appears to have form ( that means actually not) you should not say “ Brahman acquires form”. The ball is not in brahman’s court if he appears to be with form and name. the ball is in our court. So don’t say Brahman acquires. Your statement creates confusion whether Brahman becomes sagun or He appears to be sagun. If He appears to be sagun , if there exists nothing ,how can you seek His grace, how can you discuss about HIM.

Please do not avoid commenting on (i) samkhys’s creation thory and advaita with reference to BG (ii) karma in advaita ( iii) worshiping the pictures of Krishna Vishnu by advaitin instead of their own picture/image. (iv) how does changeless immovable attributesless Brahman pervade the universe