BRAHMA IN BHAGAVAT GITA

[devotee]

Namaste japmala,

I am not bashing up advaitic philosophy. I am just sharing the fact that the philosophy which is claimed to have based on Bhagavat Gita does not have the approval of the Gita. thats all.

This is the justification for all extremism in all faiths. Ï understand the scriptures better than you do", "My view is superior to yours"... such line of thinking has created most damage to mankind in the history of religions. Do you know why Wahabi Sunnis kill Sufis, Shias and the likes ? This is because they think that their interpretation of Quran and Ahadith is superior to others.

The faith that you hold on makes you see the meaning of Bhagwad Gita as you see and interpret. The others don't subscribe to your views. I have been reading Bhagwad Gita since I was a child and today I don't need any translation to understand its meaning but can understand it as it is written in Sanskrit. In my opinion, your conclusions are faulty. Moreover, I would say that Bhagwad Gita cannot be taken in isolation for exact message of what Lord Krishna said. You must have deep knowledge of Upanishads and Brahmasutras.

Now, you need not subscribe to my views. There is no need, You won't find me bashing up any faith or pointing out faults in understanding of people of who hold views different from mine. Hindu Dharma has this beauty. We are taught since our childhood to respect all views. We have Vaishnavas, Shaivas, ShAktas, Advaitins, Kabeer panthis, Aghoris etc. ... and all paths are valid. They all have their authoritative scriptures and they seem to have contradicting views. However, this contradiction appears to be only till we don't go deep into spirituality. The higher you go in spirituality, the more you are able to see that all paths lead to One Ultimate Truth.

What you are doing here by writing all this ? Is it helping you achieve higher level in spirituality ? No. Is it helping the Advaitins ? No. Is it helping anyone ? No. This is all what you think and though you have all rights to believe in whatever you want to, it is certainly not a good thing to show that you more learned than the great Advaita Acharyas of Hindu Dharma. It is just an hollow ahamkaar and nothing else.

OM

[jopmala]

Hare Krishna


I would have a better impression had the contents of your post been on Brahma instead of me. Anyway ,you have misunderstood me. You should call bhagavan sri Krishna not me an extremist because It is not me rather it is swayam bhagavan sri Krishna who is telling his dearest follower Arjuna that those ever stead fast devotees who worship sagun sakar brahma i.e. bhakti marge are superior devotees ( BG 2/XII) since this path is the holiest of all, directly experienced, righteous and easily performable.( BG 2/IX). Here the aspirants have a tangible ideal of the brahma to whom they can direct their feelings , emotion, love, will, energies etc and on the other hand , following unmanifested i.e. nirguna nirakar brahma is not easy or direct since here in this path the aspirants has to face harder task to set their thoughts on or to connect with the unmanifested brahma . ( BG 5/XII) This path is indirect because sri Krishna says that the follower of the unmanifest, undefinable, changeless ,omnipresent, constant,eternal ,unthinkable ,immovable also attain to him.( BG 3,4/XII) . You have been reading Gita for so many years so if you have another meaning or interpretation of these verses you should make it public. Believer of sankarachariya theory of advaita always use Gita verses at their convenience. they claim that their theory is based on Gita but when verses of Gita go against them, it is taken in isolation.wow! I do not understand why you take me as a advaita baiter. What wrong arguments I am putting. Are not the points I raise , valid ?. why do you think that I am preaching against advaitavada ? To have an opinion on a particular philosophy is extremism, is it your intention? Why are you comparing me with shia sunni ? Are sains like Sri Aurobindo or Bankim Chandra extremist to you ? Here I request the interested members to read the interpretation of Gita verses by Sri Dhar, Sri Aurobindo, Bankim chnadra chatterjee and Bal Gangadhar Tilak who are not member of any vashnaba group. HDF is a forum. The members are entitled to post their views. In our day to day spiritual activities we have to face different views. I am not a member of any organized spiritual group that I may gain something by criticizing advaitavada. I believe that bhagavan sri Krishna has given a direction in the Gita through his dearest follower Arjuna and if we the hindus accept bhagavan sri Krishna as the supreme Lord, we should find out that direction and try to follow to reach the goal directly and easily.

[devotee]

Namaste Japmala,

I have no intention to have any dialogue with you on this issue because you are blinded by your own clouded thinking which cannot allow any "discussion" in real sense. I am sure, you have never read Bhagwad Gita with an unbiased view and I have no hope that you will ever do. Why do I say so ? Because this may be nth time when you are writing all this ... same thing repeating, again and again. I have seen that while discussing, you don't even read what is offered by the other person and yet you are asking for a discussion ?

I knew it is futile to have any reasonable and logical argument with you. Keep it up ... whatever you think you are doing. May God bless you ! Bye.

OM

[jopmala]

Hare Krishna , devotee

Yes I have written all this many times and want to write even many more times ahead because there is nothing left to dicsuss in sanatan dharma except Brahman ( nirguna and saguna), jiva and maya. All our scriptures are written in establishing the relation amongst these three tattvas. You also post your same views repeating again and again on brahma jiva and maya in sub forum “advaita”. If you think I read Gita with a pre occupied mind. Its ok. But I request you to read at least for once Sri Aurobindo’s Integral advaita .I request you to read at least for once the interpretation of Gita verses by Sri Dhar Achariya, Sri Aurobindo, Bankim Chandra chatterjee and Lokmanya B G Tilak These great thinkers did not write their interpretation for the sake of any spiritual group or sampradaya. You have again mistaken. I am not asking you to discuss with me . I request you to let the viewers know which Gita verses support the basic advaita concept like ( 1) Nirguna brahma is the only goal but sagun brahma is not ( 2) Nirguna brahma is absolute truth but sagun brahma is not ( 3) Nirguna brahma and maya together form sagun brahma ( 4) Maya is the creator of this world ( 5) The world or creation is super impostion or illusion created my maya ( 6) the three levels of truth vyavaharika or parmarthika etc ( 7) the state of maya when brahma is in turiya ( 8) maya is the power of nirgun brahma ( 9) despite nirguna brahma being absolute truth and sagun brahma being vyavaharika truth , sagun brahma is not different from nirguna brahma ( 10) maya is not insentient or jada . you are at the liberty to substantiate by your reasonable and logical argument by quoting from the edition of Gita you have with you . If you have interpretation of Gita verses 2/IX, 3, 4,5/XII otherwise than mine please make it public for the sake of truth. I have not rewritten Gita .My views are not coming from the planet of Mars. I know how Gita has reconciled the different philosophies and established harmony. I know that Gita has not recommended all the different philosophies of sanatan dharma to be followed but at the same Gita has fixed a direction right from chapter VII to XVIII for us to follow which is easy ,direct as well as righteous. My job is to present that fixed direction. I will be doing my job . Please dont get personal . Tolerance is the sign of a jnani.

[markandeya 108 dasa]

Namaste,

This is a thread for Bhagavad Gita not Advaita, is Bhagavad Gita an isolated Advaitic text and all other Acharya have a slant of deviation in their commentaries? I see Jopmala as perfectly within his own rights to post his understanding from his respected teachers and their commentaries and Jopmala has not once insulted anyone personally but on the other hand Devotee Ji sorry to say but you have filled this post with comments that are more of an attack on him as a person rather than addressing his points of discussion. If you don't agree, why not just skip over over and not comment rather than send insulting messages, it does no good what so ever.

If you dont agree then debate with him with the content that's being put forward, or dont say anything but please lets leave personal insults out of it.

[devotee]

Namaste m1d,

There is no need for to you to be so much concerned. I and Japmala can talk without without intervention. You are not aware that we have discussed on the issue of Bhagwad Gita earlier too and my posts were just a reminder that there is valid Advaitic interpretation of Advaita too. Moreover, I fail to understand why you are unable to see that the whole thread is against understanding of of BG by Advaitins and that too with fallacious views. If Japmala is not expecting any Advaitin to answer his objections, I don't think this thread has any meaning. Anyway, we are not fighting and you can simply relax.

OM

[devotee]

Dear Japmala,

You have raised questions which are not answered in Bhagwad Gita. See below :

( 1) Nirguna brahma is the only goal but sagun brahma is not
===>Who has claimed this that Nirguna Brahman is the Only goal and Saguna Brahman is not ? Can you give any reference as to why this question at all ?

( 2) Nirguna brahma is absolute truth but sagun brahma is not

===> Before answering this question, you have to define the Absolute Truth. Moreover, this subject is dealt with in Upanishads and not in Bhagwad Gita in detail.

( 3) Nirguna brahma and maya together form sagun brahma

===> This has been dealt with in Upanishads and is not a subject of Bhagwad Gita.

( 4) Maya is the creator of this world

====> This is a wrong statement. MAyA is not the Creator but Ishvara is the Creator. MAyA is Prakriti and that brings this universe in existence with susbtratum as Brahman. Refer BG 9.10. AtmA / Brahman doesn't really act. Please refer Bhagwad Gita 13.29 and 13.31.

( 5) The world or creation is super impostion or illusion created my maya

====> This has not been dealt with in Bhagwad Gita but in Upanishads.

( 6) the three levels of truth vyavaharika or parmarthika etc

====> Please refer to Upanishads for this. This is not dealt with in BG.

( 7) the state of maya when brahma is in turiya

====> This question is not clear. Moreover, this again is dealt with in detail in Upanishads and not in BG.

( 8) maya is the power of nirgun brahma

====> This question is not clear. You should understand what MAyA is. Without MAyA, nothing can be done in this world. All works are performed by the three gunas of MAYA. Please refer to BG.

( 9) despite nirguna brahma being absolute truth and sagun brahma being vyavaharika truth , sagun brahma is not different from nirguna brahma (

====> If you are seen through a tainted glass, I will see your tainted picture. However, you don't really change. Do you ?

10) maya is not insentient or jada .

=====> You have to first define what you mean by Jada.

************************

So, the questions that you are trying to ask or trying to address are mostly not dealt with in Bhagwad Gita. You are asking questions of Chemistry with stipulated condition that those must be answered from book of Physics. All your questions are answered in Upanishads. If you are addressing the questions that you have written above, I would advise you to look for the answers in Upanishads and not in BG.

************************

I will quit here as some of your friends feel that I am unjustifiably attacking you. Sorry, for creating this misunderstanding.

OM

[markandeya 108 dasa]

Namaste Devotee Ji,

Thank you for your reply, I didnt want to bring it up but I am tired of insults online, you I am surprised, others have a natural affiliation because its second nature and like a piece of wood floating on a river it cant see it's own reflection.

[devotee]

Namaste japmala,

If you have interpretation of Gita verses 2/IX, 3, 4,5/XII otherwise than mine please make it public for the sake of truth.

There appears to be something wrong with the verses numbers. Can you check it again and let me know which verses you are talking about ? Is it chapter 9 verse 2 and chapter 12 verses 3,4,5 ?

Perhaps you want to say that Lord Krishna advises that Bhakti was an easier path and Advaita (meditating upon the Nirguna Brahman) is a difficult one ? There is nothing wrong in the meaning of verses. However, Lord Krishna doesn't say that Advaita path is not a valid path. Does he say so anywhere in BG ?

These paths of Bhakti and Advaita Sadhana are not mere theories in Hindu Dharma. You have met Bhakta saints but I think you should meet a true saint who is on Advaita Sadhana. Remember, what Lord Krishna says in Bhagwad Gita : chapter4.33 to 35 that there is nothing better than Jnana which makes one pure and that should be learnt from a JnAni and by having that knowledge you will never be deluded. These verses accept that there is JnAn which has to be learnt from JnAnis and that is not readily available in BG and that by knowing that we shall never get deluded.

OK. I wanted to quit a few posts earlier but sudden appearance of your friend m1d on the scene made me realise that perhaps my postings are giving some some wrong indication to some people. I have already discussed this issue with you at length earlier and we didn't arrive at any conclusion but kept wandering about here and there and I have no delusion that we can sort it out in this thread. So, Good Bye.

OM

[jopmala]

Namaste devotee

It is quite clear from your post that the points raised by me regarding basic advaita concept have no support in the Bhagvad Gita but are supported by Upanishad. I am surprised that although Gita is regarded as the essence of Upanishad , but these basic concept of advaita are missing in the Gita. Therefore, the claim by advaitin that the theory is based on Gita is yet to establish.

Yes it is chapter 9 verse 2 and chapter 12 verses 3,4,5.

Not me but it is bhagavan sri Krishna who says that worshiping him i.e. sagun sakar Brahman is easier than worshiping unmanifested Brahman.

It is quite interesting to know the reasoning that since sri Krishna does not say advaita path is invalid, its ok to follow. But the fact is ,sri Krishna says that those who worship unmanifested Brahman they also attain to me. That means if some one likes to go to Delhi from Kolkata by train via Chennai and Mumbai instead of direct shortest route he will also reach Delhi. This journey is not unauthorised but difficult , time taking and the traveler will not be regarded as intelligent that’s all.

I agree that 4.33 to 4.35 go in favour of jnani but also read “ yogi is superior to the ascetic. He is considered to be superior even to jnani and karmi”-6.46 of BG.who is the yogi here if he is not jnani and karmi

I shall write verses from chapter 18. First 18.50 which says “ Arjuna , know from me briefly the process through which man having attained actionlessness, which is the highest consummation of jnan yoga, reaches Brahman” ( nistha jnanasya ya para) then come to 51 to 53 which suggest the process and most importantly 18.54 which says “ Established in identity with Brahman and cheerful in mind, neither grieving nor craving for anything ,regarding all being alike, he ( who reaches Brahman by following above process) attains supreme devotion unto ME” . and finally 18.55 says “ Through that supreme devotion , he comes to know me in reality what and who I am and thereby knowing me truly he forthwith enters into ME” Translation of these verses are taken from Gita press edition. Therefore , there is no doubt that Gita is out and out a bhaktivadi grantha.