Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: sri krishna is real not illusion

  1. #1
    Join Date
    February 2012
    Location
    india
    Age
    59
    Posts
    151
    Rep Power
    314

    sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste

    BG verse 4.6 sri Krishna says “ I am not bound by the cycles of birth, and am immortal and Lord of all beings. Yet remaining steadfast in my own nature, I come into being through my own divine power ( atmamayaya)”

    Then he says the reason of his coming into being or avatara

    Verse 4.7-8 “ when ever righteousness declines and unrighteousness thrives, I incarnate myself for protecting the virtuous, for destroying the wicked and for setting righteousness on firm foundations, I born and reborn from age to age”

    The follower of some school of thought does not believe in the incarnation of sri bhagavan. They believe and want every one to believe that avatari Brahman or sri Krishna is not real but illusion or perception . According to them, there was never a time when God came into being. By definition God is infinite, unborn or changeless; therefore the finite form is unreal and nothing but a perception or illusion .

    First we have to have belief in what sri Krishna swayam says in verse 4.5 that HE has passed through many life and HE knows all of them. That means avatari form of Brahman or sri Krishna is not a perception or illusion. HE is real. We have to have belief in what HE says in verse 4.7-8 that he born and reborn from age to age for protecting virtuous, destroying the wicked and setting dharma on firm foundations. These actions can not be done by any personality who is regarded as illusion or perception. The verses of the Bhagavad Gita are not perception.

    We as a devotee have to believe that we can not decide what bhagavan can do or what not. We can not say with arguments that since he is infinite, he can not become finite, since changeless can not change, since unborn can not have birth. We can not doubt that HE is all mighty or all powerful. There should not be anything which sri Krishna can not do ? Being almighty , if bhagavan can not do certain thing, will he be regarded almighty ? secondly, bhagavan himself is saying “ I come into being or I incarnate” where is the place of doubt in his incarnation or avatar or coming into being ? why people apply their own reasoning in bhagavan’s assertion instead of honoring it as words from swayam bhagavan himself ? There is some school of thought which raises question or create doubt about the reality of the form of sri krishna because this is their way of putting thing in place. They never goes by direct meaning of the verse. They will imagine an indirect meaning of the verse. According to them, one aspect of Brahman is real but another aspect is illusion.

    According to their view , the form of sri Krishna that Arjune saw as his guide and philosopher is not real. He is veiled by yogamaya that is the power of Brahman which veils the reality that is Brahman.

    The fact is that maya has become illusive power or veiling power at the hands of sankaracharya, before him, maya was regarded as“ mysterious power of the will or sankalpa shakti or iccha shakti”. Maya is a creative power. Why should Brahman have a veiling power ? whom to veil if jagat is mithya and jiva brahman ? Even in BG , not a single verse expresses the idea that maya is a veiling power . BG verse 9.8 sri Krishna says “ Taking control of my own prakriti, I create again and again the entire mass of these beings”. The word is “ visrijami punah punah” . Does the word ‘ visrijami’ mean veiling ? Again in verse 9.10 sri Krishna says “ It is under my lead that prakriti brings forth all things both animate and inanimate”. Verse 14.3 sri Krishna says “ prakriti is my womb on that I cast my seed whence spring all beings” therefore it is very clear from BG that maya is not a veiling power. It helps sri bhagavan to create so it is a creative power. These verses are not narrated by any human being but swayam bhagavan himself. My question is why follower of such school of thought do not have the belief in the words of swayam bhagavan sri Krishna ? why they have to imagine what sri krishna does not assert al all in BG ? Like wise in verse, 14.7 sri Krishna says “ Mamai’va’msho jivaloke jivabhutah sanatanah” but these people will argue that if this verse is taken in its facevalue then Brahman is cut into pieces which is not acceptable . question is if sri Krishna is saying “ a portion of myself” does it always mean that he is being cut into pieces ? when rays of sun come to the earth , is the sun cut into pieces ? Are the rays not part of the sun ? when sparks come out of ball of fire, is the ball cut into pieces ? so we have to understand that if we judge the action of God with our human intelligence or reason without his kripa that will result fatal for us.

    By what reason some people say that human form of sri Krishna is finite ? Verse 9.11 sri Krishna says “ Fools not knowing MY supreme nature as the Lord of creation despise ME in MY human form”. The essence of verse 7.24 is “ the devotees take me to be somebody with a visible form, that is, having the nature of a man, fish or tortoise etc while I remain beyond the reach of maya. But though I take on the nature of man and other beings out of divine playfulness, it does not take away from my essential changeless nature. This they ( those of small understanding) fail to understand” – Sridharacharaya.

    In Srimad Bhagavat 10/14/55 sri sukhdev says “ You should know Krishna to be the original soul of all living entities. For the benefit of the whole universe, HE has out of HIS causeless mercy, comes into being as a ordinary human being. HE has done this by the strength of HIS internal potency”

    In Verse 9.5 of BG he is talking about HIS marvelous power of HIS divine yoga ( yogam aishvaram) by the power of which, HE remains outside the beings though sustaining them for HE is solitary. Verse 4.13 sri Krishna says “ Though I am the creator, know ME to be changeless and above action”. In verse 9.5-6 HE is Nirguno-guni that is though HE is nirguna but at the same time HE is saguna. Verse 13.15 says “ HE exists without and within all beings HE is unmoving and also moving. HE is beyond grasp being too subtle. HE is utterly distant and yet so near” verse 13-16 says “ though indivisible, HE is parceled out among beings”. In describing Brahman , HIS attributeless aspect sri Krishna says in verse 13.13-14 that everywhere are His ( attributeless Brahman) hands and feet, His eyes, heads and faces are on all sides and everywhere are his ears. He seems to have the functioning of the senses is yet devoid of the senses, is unattached yet sustaining everything, unaffected by the gunas and yet enjoys them. Therefore reality of Brahman is not related with His form or formlessness. He can do everything even when He is without form. He is as real without form as He is with form. It is not like He is real when without form and unreal when with form. He is always real irrespective of with form or without form. Actually the problem with the philosophy which says that attributeless , formless powerless Brahman is the only real is that they want to prove “ My way is highway”. They have fixed their philosophy to one aspect of Brahman which is the only real and to claim superiority of their philosophy they negate other aspect of Brahman as illusion or perception. Follower of such school of thought can not accept Brahman with form attributes and power as real because in that case , their fixed concept of Brahman without attributes or form as the highest will be at stake. Such follower will deliver lecture by saying that Brahman without attributes and with attributes is two sides of a coin but in practice they follow Brahman without attributes as higher and real and Brahman with attributes as lower and illusion. This is the extent of their hypocrisy. Discrimination even with the aspects of Brahman ! such follower now deciding what is possible or what is impossible in the verses of Gita !

    Believer of a particular school of thought do not understand yoga maya. Verses 9.5, 10.7, 11.8 clearly say that yogamaya is not veling power or power to create illusion. Yogamaya does not create illusion out of truth. When we see snake in rope , yogamaya does not operate here .Seeing mirage in desert does not require any yogamaya. Human being suffers the cycles of birth and death for his karma. Yogamaya has no role in human births and deaths but sri Krishna borns and reborns from age to age by using HIS power yogamaya. Therefore HIS birth and deaths can not be compared with that of jiva. Perception, illusion are all human affairs having scientific reasoning but yogamaya is not human power that we can understand it by sheer reasoning. It is Swayam bhagavan sri krishn’a power. Yogamaya , the superb skill of creation or the capacity for achieving what is apparently impossible is referred to in the Vedanta as maya . Hence yogamaya means maya in the form of yoga. In fact maya and yoga are synonymous with each other. In verse 14.3 this prakriti is described as Mahat brahma. Therefore it is foolishness to question how being unborn, infinite, unmanifest , HE is born or finite or manifested. HE is as real in infinite as HE is in finite, HE is as real in unborn as he is born, HE is as real in unmanifest as HE is in manifest. In every way HE remains same as HE always does. HE is right and at the same HE is wrong also. we are fool when we think that What is true for us is also true for bhagavan sri Krishna. The argument which is fit for worldly affairs is not fit for divya or divine matters.

    Believers of a particular philosophy are selective in their approach towards BG. The verses which suits their philosophy, that’s ok but which do not immediately they brand it as “ not possible”. All the verses which praises jnan marg are honoured by them as a assertion from sri Krishna swayam but contrary to that, the verses which does not suit their view directly, they will imagine some meaning and impose that imaginary meaning to serve their purpose. When swayam sri Krishna says in verse 12.2 that worshiping HIM with form is easier and superior to that of without form. They find it difficult to digest and comes out with imaginary explanation. Again in verse 12.3 sri Krishna very clearly mentions unmanifest Brahman as aksharam kutastham but they can not accept it . they comes out with another meaning instead of direct meaning in which maya is said to be kutastham.
    Last edited by jopmala; 03 December 2015 at 09:13 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    February 2012
    Location
    india
    Age
    59
    Posts
    151
    Rep Power
    314

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste

    In chapter 11 of Bhagavad Gita sri Krishna shows viswarupa to Arjune. Now believer of advaita school of thought questioning whether it is possible or not and at the end of their argument they like to prove by their silly logic that God ( I do not know who is this God because in Gita there is only sri Krishna who is both sakar nirakar sagun and nirgun in nature) is infinite without beginning and end, there is nothing outside God , Arjune was inside it as the entire world was within that form then how could he see all these etc etc ?

    I think the first condition of understanding these divya activites of sri Krishna is that we have to know from which philosophical stand point we are going to put arguments. If we believe that by definition sri Krishna is infinite, unborn imperishable immutable etc etc which is just HIS one aspect then there will be no meaning to these divya phenomenon because these activities come from another aspect of sri krisha where HE is all powerful with full of potencies having form and attributes, Where HE is born for paritrayanam sadhunam vinashaya cha duskritam and dharma samsthapanaya from age to age. Here HE is as real as HE is in infinite or without form and attributes. Form or Formlessness is not the criteria of sri krishna's reality or else. HE is always real irrespective of HIS form or without form. HE is not like us human.

    First , we have to have belief in what sri Krishna says in BG. HE says “ I born and reborn from age to age”. We can not question it. HE HIMSELF mentions how HE is born , moreover, these are HIS own words. Our duty is to close our own eyes and believe in HIS words. Then HE says that we should understand HIS divine birth and activities in their true nature ( 4.9). therefore it is quite simple to believe that if we analyze sri Krishna’s birth and activities from human perspective that will be of no use. We have to understand why HE says “ all beings dwell in me but I do not dwell in them” which is possibles due to HIS yogam aishvaram the marvelous power of HIS divine yoga. HE is known as Lord of yoga. HE does everything what ever HE wants through this yoga power. In verse 2.50 sri Krishna says ‘yogah karmasu kaushalam’ therefore we need not understand yogamaya as a delusive or illousive power. Verse 9.5, 10.7, 11.8 reveal how HE works with this power. This is aisvarika yoga ( yogam isvaram -11.8)

    In the case of viswarupa darshan, it is clear that before viswarupa dharshan takes place sri Krishna is in human form to whom Arjune is speaking normally and at the end of it, Arjune requests sri Krishna to come back to HIS human form. Before that Arjune asks if he is capable of beholding this ( 11.4) but sri Krishna says that he ( Arjune) can not behold HIM with his normal eyes so sri Krishna gives him divine vision ( divyam chakshu) to see HIS yogam aishvaram ( 11.8). we should note what sri Krishna says in verse 11.48,11.52,11.53. HE says this form of HIM which Arjune has seen is very difficult to see. Neither by the study of the Vedas nor by penance, nor by charity, nor by sacrifices can HE be seen in the form of which Arjune has seen. HE even says in 11.48 that HE can not seen in this form in this mortal world by any one else other than Arjune. Therefore what Mata Yashoda has seen in the mouth of child Krishna can not be compared with viswarupa darshan of Arjune. Neither yashoda is provided any divine eye nor she begs for viswarupa. More important whatever mata yashoda has seen , she has never expressed it to any one because at the same moment she has forgotten what she has seen. Here Arjune has described what he has seen in viswarupa. I am not denying that mata has not seen anything. Sri Krishna can do anything HE wants.

    Advaita beliver raises question how Arjune can see this viswarupa as he himself is inside it. I want to remind them that Arjune has seen even “ all those of Dhritarashtra together with hosts of kings and also Bhisma, Drona, and Karna along with the leading fighters on our sides” ( 11.26-27) who are also in front of him in the battle field. Whether Arjune is inside or outside is meaningless question because the whole episode is divine (11.47). Even sri Krishna is not same as HE is always to Arjune. Sri Krishna has to come back to HIS original gracious human form ( 11.50).

    Therefore questioning such divine happening from the perspective of imperfect human reasoning is not only foolish but also unbecoming for a follower of sri krishna.

    At the end sri Krishna says to Arjune in verse 11.54 “ but by single minded devotion alone ( bhaktya tv ananyaya ) , I can thus be seen in this form and known in essence and even entered into” and 11.55 “ He who works for ME, regards ME as his goal, worships ME, all unattached, and bears enmity to none, comes to ME”. Jnanis who do not believe in HIS divine birth and activities raises silly questions only to impose their own imaginary philosophy. If we go by their view than everything even Ved-Vedanta, Gita, Mahabharat and jnan contained in these scriptures become mere perception. Can you think the words which are coming out of swayam bhagavan sri Krishna are treated as just perception or bhrama ? can we explain by our imperfect human reasoning what is possible or impossible for sri Krishna swayam ? I do not understand what the advaitic people mean by the word “ God”. We who belong to sanatan hindu dharma prefer to take the name ‘sri Krishna’ so far Gita is concerned. By using “ God” do they mean something else ?

    By the way, advaitic believer treats maya as delusive or something like magic which only creates illusion and hides reality or ignorance etc. According to advaitic view this maya can only be crossed by attaining jnan but Gita says some thing else. Verse 7.14 says “ this divine maya is very difficult to overcome. But those who seek refuge in ME alone can cross this” that means without HIS grace maya can not be got rid of. But advaitic view says sri Krishna is nothing but an illusion then how can they take refuge in HIM ? on the other hand their only reality nirgun nirakar Brahman being infinite unthinkable undefinable immutable imperishable is unable to give them any refuge.

    I think instead of analyzing how Arjune can see viswarupa even when he is inside it, advaitic beliver should pay attention to explain how immutable infinite unthinkable Brahman is deluded by its own maya only to become jiva and suffers the cycles of birth and death ?. How same maya acts differently with same Brahman to become iswara and jiva ? why Brahman in the form of jiva is not as powerful as Brahman in the form of iswara ? Why should Brahman in the form of jiva has to cross his own power maya to regain his brahmattva ? Is it possible that nirguna nirakar infinite immutable brahman is suffering the cycles of birth and death here in this universe ? so many questions for them to research instead of viswarupa darshan by Arjune.
    Last edited by jopmala; 10 December 2015 at 10:09 PM.

  3. #3

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Dandavat Pranams Jopmal Prabhu Ji

    The fact is that maya has become illusive power or veiling power at the hands of sankaracharya, before him, maya was regarded as“ mysterious power of the will or sankalpa shakti or iccha shakti”. Maya is a creative power.
    Pranams again and again for this and the nature of your post. Maya does not mean the world is illusion also. Although personally I would refrain on putting the blame on Sri Adi Shankara and direct it towards the mistranslated and corruptions of the monotheistic mundane materialists who made all these errors purposely.

    Simple translation

    Ma~ Devi
    Ya~appearance

    For a simpleton like me I see that Maya is the reflection of devi in nature. Mahamaya is devi in the brahmanda and yogamaya is devi in full union with Parabrahman revealing the intimate nature of nirguna Brahman through brahmarandhra. Maya simple does not mean the outside world is an illusion. All illusions are perception based within the citta.

    To think that Sri Krsna is somehow related to illusion is inconceivable and not worth a second thought......

    I hope someone more qualified than me can make these things more clear and reveal the true nature that Vedanta is only dealing with divinity and the awakening of ours and everythings divine nature which is all pervasive not localised in anyway both within and without.

    Jai Gurudatta

  4. #4
    Join Date
    July 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Age
    64
    Posts
    235
    Rep Power
    390

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste

    I do not understand what the advaitic people mean by the word “ God”. We who belong to sanatan hindu dharma prefer to take the name ‘sri Krishna’ so far Gita is concerned. By using “ God” do they mean something else?

    God is also a term thoughtless adopted from Christianity. God has no equivalent in Sanskrit.

    God comes closest to Ishvara.
    God in Christianity has no name!!!
    The term Brahman is unknown in Christianity. There is a latin term ‚numen‘ that comes closest to Brahman. The ‚holy spirit‘, as the impersonal view of God may also come close to.

    Sanskrit and Sanatana Dharma are too complex to fit into tight Christian view.

    The Christian and the from Christianity influenced Indian translators of Vedic scriptures have made it easy with this ‚all in one‘ solution.
    God is used for Ishvara and for Brahman and for all related terms ... Indians differentiate.

    Otherwise non-Hindu translators had to dive deep into Vedic metaphysics and mysticisms, and their readers too. In addition metaphysics and mysticisms are banned in Christianity! Christians do not even knwo what this is. Scriptures like Bhagavad Gita or the Upanishads were burned in Middle Ages!

    Christianity has the threefold view – God father, son and holy spirit. This – on the smallest common denominator - could be seen as

    God father – the personal view (Ishvara) Brahman saguna
    Holy spirit – the impersonal view (Brahman) Brahman nirguna
    Son, only Jesus possible – the incarnate God

    yet is does not fit to the diversity and depth of Vedic wisdom.

    Pranam
    Dance with Shiva - live with Shiva - merge with Shiva

  5. #5

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste Indialover Ji,

    Ishwara as I understand is not the same as the God of the Abrahmic faiths as for them God is an external agent that controls the world, where Ishwara is internal and acts through the citta filling, transforming the citta with His Aishvarya and Vibhuti's and governs the tri lokas, indriyas~ sense consciousness, Manas~ quality of Mind and Buddhi's~ supra intermediate state, the internal states and condition of the citta and the jiva is one with saguna Brahman and transforms the citta to the state of divinity non different to the quality of Ishwara, so there is no connection at all with the Abrahamic version of God acting as an external agent.

    Siya Ram

  6. #6

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste Indialover

    I am not sure why you wrote this in this thread as it has very little to do with the content that is written, although what you say has some validity and I dont see the constant need to keep bringing up Christianity, Sanatana Dharma has enough of its own knowledge to keep us interested.

    Ultimately the best thing to do is just ignore these false teachings and concentrate on what is important, chitta bhavana or training the chitta for samadhi.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    July 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Age
    64
    Posts
    235
    Rep Power
    390

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Dear Markandeya 108 dasa

    Seems you are overwhelmed by rajas ...

    The difinition of Ishvara varies from darshana to darshana. Your definition may by one of many. Anyhow it is the closed term for the Christian‘s God father. I did not say that it is the same.

    I tried to answer jopmalas question
    I do not understand what the advaitic people mean by the word “ God”. We who belong to sanatan hindu dharma prefer to take the name ‘sri Krishna’ so far Gita is concerned. By using “ God” do they mean something else?
    with this post … should I, in future, ask for your permission prior to posting?

    What is important in my life I prefer to decide by my own.

    Pranam
    Dance with Shiva - live with Shiva - merge with Shiva

  8. #8

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste

    Overwhelemed By rajas

    i dont think so, but answering a question on Advaita and bringing a mundane and wrong interpretation on Ishwara comparing it to to the Christian version of God has nothing to do with either Adwaita or the post in which Jopmala Ji wrote, its just your subconscious that is conditioned by that religion not mine.The thread has nothing to do with Christian God and no need to even include the Christian Version, its a fair comment when there is discussion on the teachings of vedanta per different traditional approach Christianity does not need to be mentioned or be included in that discussion to find the right context.



    There are not many versions of Ishwara, maybe only google says there is which is hardly an authority for study of Vedanta.


    Does every post have to go through Christian filter to become valid by comparison thats my point, its not needed.

    should I, in future, ask for your permission prior to posting?

    What is important in my life I prefer to decide by my own.
    Thought did not cross my mind even for a second, but lets keep this thread for discussions on Vedanta to find the true essence and Christian Theology is not part of this thread or needed.

    Lets see what Jopmala Ji says, if he so wishes as he knows the essence of his own post.

    Hare Krsna
    Last edited by markandeya 108 dasa; 30 March 2019 at 09:45 PM.

  9. #9

    Re: sri krishna is real not illusion

    Namaste Jopmala Ji

    I wrote something sometime back and it took me a while to find it again in a Hare Krsna Group, with some recent editing.


    Maya is quite complex and there are heaps of mistranslated texts and vedic terms which date back to the early translations by the Europeans on Adi Shankaras original works, which is the basis of Mayavadi philosophy which is not present in the original teachings of Sri Adi Shankara, so Adi Shankaras works on Uttara Mimasa of Upanishads is not categorised as Mayavada its the European translations that are Mayavada. Sadly the context has been lost and anyone who is not a devotee is considered a mayavadi. But without getting to much into this because there is so much to work to go through on mass its almost impossible to deal with this in a regular way due to religious and cult mentality.

    Ironically the majority of Western Gaudia Vaisnavism is Mayavada and the approach is impersonal, but can the eye see the whole body if the eye is pressed against the skin, there needs to be a degree of detachment to see the whole form of the Body. This is mainly due to the Mundane Monotheistic conditioning of certain devotees coming from Christianity.

    In Original Veda Maya was the creative potency of Ishwara who reflects the divine in all created objects in the phenomenal world, like seeing the beauty in the sun rise and sun set was the reflection of awakening and marriage of Surya Narayana with Devi. The 9 divine rivers such as Ganga Ma, Yamuna Devi, Saraswati devi, Namada Devi and so on are Maya Devi reflecting in nature, in original Vedic culture all aspects of nature was Ma the manifestation of the divine mother Ma who is linking us wth the Supreme divinity who is all pervasive and not localised, this is the original context of what Maya is before the translation periods.
    Simple translation

    Ma~ Devi
    Ya~appearance

    Maya is the reflection of devi in nature. Mahamaya is devi in the brahmanda which purifies the conditions in the mind/chitta and yogamaya is devi in full union with Parabrahman revealing the intimate nature of nirguna Brahman through the brahmarandhra. Maya simple does not mean the outside world is an illusion. All illusions are perception based within the citta the correct word in Vedanta is mithya, mithya and Maya are two different things.


    Maybe a lot to take it but time is a key element in gradually transforming our consciousness from mundane vision ie being bound by the gunas to being released by bhakti Devi maya.And 2nd Chapter holds all the keys to Self realization, all of Bhagavad Gita and Vedanta is in 2nd Chapter if one knows how to understand this extremely important teaching on samkhya By Sri Krsna.

    Radha is the Supreme form Maya as pure Bhakti.

    There are reasons for this mistranslation which is to hamper the vision of advaita to see the divine who resides equally within everything and everyone and super impose that the outside world is somehow an illusion rather than the first perception based union with the Divine.


    yo mam pasyati sarvatra
    sarvam ca mayi pasyati
    tasyaham na pranasyami
    sa ca me na pranasyati

    BG 6.30

    Nitai Gaura Premanande!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. the world is an illusion, but its real enough
    By the sadhu in forum Advaita
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 04 July 2015, 06:53 AM
  2. A purpose of an illusion
    By mayakruha in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 29 June 2012, 06:15 PM
  3. Krishna's Real Nature
    By sunyata07 in forum Bhagavad Gita
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 20 August 2011, 09:25 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •