Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 70

Thread: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

  1. #1

    Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Hare Krishna,

    I have been attending a Hare Krishna a few Sundays now, and have tried to learn more and more about the movement, and about the Dharma in general.
    However, there is one point I cannot get over: Why does ISKCON, and Prabhupada, speak so much against the impersonalists and Advaita in general?
    I have grown to become a strong believer in Advaita and Shankara, but also have a strong attachment to ISKCON. But it seems these are in opposition.
    What is wrong with believing God to be formless and nameless? What is wrong in believing that All is One, including the non-difference between Atman and Brahman? It does not place man above God, nor below.

    And, for me, it fits into the attainment or understanding of God through chanting, and not through the ego or the logic of man...

    Can I believe in both? Why can't ISKCON be open and accept the impersonalists? Why must this religion, also, insist on attacking other beliefs and creating this aggression between the thoughts?
    I thought ISKCON was different... After all they say it doesn't matter what you call God...

  2. #2

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    I'm not sure. I'm Advaita myself and I certainly think you can look at it both ways.

    To be honest, the little I know if ISKCON have not been so positive, to me they do seem rather fundamental.

    Where do you live? Maybe there is another alternative? Another temple you could go to?

    Maya

  3. Post Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Hare Krishna.
    Our forceful refutation of impersonalistic mayavada philosophy may not have been palatable for some, but it was definitely necessary. The Vaisnava acaryas words that we often quote are harsh not because they are crazy fanatics, but their words are commensurate with the dangers of falling into the mayavadi trap. In the beginning we may not even see what the big deal is about this personal-impersonal issue, but that is because we have not developed a mature Vaisnava perspective yet. That is why the acaryas have to literally yell out their cautions, because we may not even see the pitfalls. If the pitfalls were obvious to everyone then we would not need to use such strong words.

    Mayavada philosophy is dangerous because it can be very, very subtle and work its way into the way we view everything. It may masquerade as some all-loving, nice philosophy but if you follow the trail of the philosophy to its basis, you will find that it is ultimately very offensive to the Personality of God. Consequently, there is no hope of making advancement in realizing our original spiritual nature in a loving relationship with God if we are stuck with an impersonalist ontology - even though we may externally be adopting some personalist spiritualist practices. A common example of what damage impersonal philosophy can do is this: we may think that God is obligated to respond to our spiritual practices. We may unconsciously think "Oh I'm doing all this japa, it's about time God showed up because that's how the formula is supposed to work." In this way, we unconsciously reduce God to an impersonal vending-machine who can be controlled by us by regulated spiritual processes. Naturally this is a very offensive mindset that blocks any hope of developing a meaningful relationship with God. That is one of the dangers. It is subtle, but we eventually notice it.

    Instead, a personalist understands that spiritual advancement is about uncovering a relationship with God. Nobody is obliged to do anything, but rather we gradually develop a spontaneous mood of service and love, which then gives real taste in our relationship with God. This beautiful and most important aspect of the Personality of God is ruthlessly hacked away by the impersonalists. Instead, the idea that WE are God is subtly but surely injected into the ontology of the impersonalist, and that is an ego-trip that is very, very hard to reverse. Lord Chaitanya used to say that a Mayavadi is the greatest offender at the lotus feet of Krishna because he thinks Krishna has material body and thinks himself to be equal to God. That's why He said: Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: if one associates with the Māyāvāda philosophy, his devotional life is doomed.

    If you have an impersonal background then you may have a good deal of un-learning to do, but it will surely be possible if you take up a careful study of Prabhupada's books. The process of Krsna Consciousness that Prabhupada gave us is so simple that it can be practiced by anyone in any condition of life in any location: chanting the Holy Names of God. Why is this the process? Because it is strongly recommended in the scriptures as the only way in this age:
    harer nāma harer nāma
    harer nāmaiva kevalam
    kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva
    nāsty eva gatir anyathā

    TRANSLATION

    In this Age of Kali there is no other means, no other means, no other means for self-realization than chanting the holy name, chanting the holy name, chanting the holy name of Lord Hari.
    Chant...
    Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare
    Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare

    ...and be happy!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    February 2011
    Location
    st louis, usa
    Posts
    695
    Rep Power
    1511

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Quote Originally Posted by AnrBjotk View Post
    I have grown to become a strong believer in Advaita and Shankara, but also have a strong attachment to ISKCON. But it seems these are in opposition
    Can I believe in both? Why can't ISKCON be open and accept the impersonalists? Why must this religion, also, insist on attacking other beliefs and creating this aggression between the thoughts?
    I thought ISKCON was different... After all they say it doesn't matter what you call God...
    '' Can I believe in both? Why can't ISKCON be open and accept the impersonalists?''

    welcome AnrBjotk, yes majority hindus believe in all of the above, sadly some stretch it too far. Most just ignore the divisive arguements put forward by sampradaya buffs or nuts, no offence meant..
    Krishna wouldnt have shown vishva rupa, had he not had any inclination to explain Brahman concept to Arjuna. One entire chapter 11 was about Krishna's universal or cosmic form, which is something like Brahman. Flexibility is the name of the game for overwhelming number of hindus. Iskcon is a wonderful organization, keep going there. Also read upanishads ( if you havent done so already) Namaste.

  5. #5

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Iskcon is name of organization. I think you attracted to the devotion of Krsna. In Hindu there is some Vaishnava sect who have Krsna devotion for istadevata. Not only iskcon. You can choose.

    But personally for me, between form and formless, personal and impersonal acctually is same.

    OM. VAJRA. VISHNUYA. SVAHA
    OM. VAJRA. GARUDA. CALE CALE. HUM PHAT


    OM. AMOGHA VAIROCANA. MAHA-MUDRA. MANI PADMA JVALA PRAVARTTAYA. HUM

    Om Saha Nau-Avatu |
    Saha Nau Bhunaktu |
    Saha Viiryam Karava-Avahai |
    Tejasvi Nau-Adhii-Tam-Astu Maa Vidviss-Aavahai |
    Om Shaantih Shaantih Shaantih ||


  6. #6
    Join Date
    July 2010
    Location
    The Holy Land - India
    Posts
    2,797
    Rep Power
    5343

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Namaste AB,

    I would just take the best from both worlds. You can go to the ISKCON mandir and do the chanting etc. but not accept everything they have to say. You could go to another Hindu mandir, if there is one in your area, and enjoy their puja too. You could alternate between the two. Some people go to ISKCON because the exuberance there is infectious, but ignore some of their negativity. Every sampradaye has its merits (and some drawbacks), and the trick is to ignore their negativity towards other sampradayes. You cannot change the world. The only person you have control over is yourself!

    Pranam.

  7. #7

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Dearest AnrBjotk,

    Namaste!

    Srila Prabhupada taught that liberation, as such, consists of entering into a relationship of devotional service with Lord Krsna. The contours of that liberation depend greatly on the nature and personality of Krsna - feeding Krsna prasadam that He enjoys, behaving in a way that is pleasing to Him, acting toward Him as a real person, because He is a real person.

    If you believed that what would set people free was entering into a relationship with a very personal God, you might believe along with Srila Prabhupada that impersonalists were missing the point and that Shankara was objectively wrong.

    Attending an ISKCON temple doesn't mean that you buy everything Srila Prabhupada taught. It could just mean that you like singing and dancing. But it does mean that you will probably continue to hear things that you disagree with.

    As Shian said, there are other Vaishnava groups and teachers, if you feel really strongly drawn to Lord Vishnu. You may want to check out a Vedanta Society, too. You might also want to just visit your nearest Hindu temple. It won't be as exciting as an ISKCON temple on Sunday night, but most have a tangible energy all their own. You can find out if they're having any lectures, and that's a great way to meet others with similar interests.

    Good luck, and if you ever need to talk with someone else who likes ISKCON, but doesn't want to join up, feel free to shoot me a line.

    VB

  8. #8
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    59
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4720

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Namaste AB,

    Quote Originally Posted by AnrBjotk View Post
    I have been attending a Hare Krishna a few Sundays now, and have tried to learn more and more about the movement, and about the Dharma in general.
    However, there is one point I cannot get over: Why does ISKCON, and Prabhupada, speak so much against the impersonalists and Advaita in general?
    I have grown to become a strong believer in Advaita and Shankara, but also have a strong attachment to ISKCON. But it seems these are in opposition.
    What is wrong with believing God to be formless and nameless? What is wrong in believing that All is One, including the non-difference between Atman and Brahman? It does not place man above God, nor below.

    And, for me, it fits into the attainment or understanding of God through chanting, and not through the ego or the logic of man...

    Can I believe in both? Why can't ISKCON be open and accept the impersonalists? Why must this religion, also, insist on attacking other beliefs and creating this aggression between the thoughts?
    I thought ISKCON was different... After all they say it doesn't matter what you call God...
    I don't think this thread should be in this section as it doesn't speak high of ISKCON but of its narrow-mindedness.

    I love going to ISKCON temples. However, I was shocked when I came into the contact of some ISKCONites on this forum and elsewhere on the internet. I can tell you only these things :

    a) ISKCON doesn't understand Advaita even a bit and therefore, they should stay away from it. Upanishads say that Advaita is not for people who are not fit for it. The easy path is Bhakti Yoga ... Advaita is difficult to understand and also follow.

    b) ISKCON is what it is and they understand what their Guru said to them. So, there is no pint fighting them. You have to decide which path suits you.

    c) ISKCONites unnecessary waste their energy over Advaita-bashing. They can utilise this time effectively on their bhajan kirtans.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  9. #9

    Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Quote Originally Posted by GauraHari View Post
    Hare Krishna.
    Our forceful refutation of impersonalistic mayavada philosophy may not have been palatable for some, but it was definitely necessary. The Vaisnava acaryas words that we often quote are harsh not because they are crazy fanatics, but their words are commensurate with the dangers of falling into the mayavadi trap. In the beginning we may not even see what the big deal is about this personal-impersonal issue, but that is because we have not developed a mature Vaisnava perspective yet. That is why the acaryas have to literally yell out their cautions, because we may not even see the pitfalls. If the pitfalls were obvious to everyone then we would not need to use such strong words.

    Mayavada philosophy is dangerous because it can be very, very subtle and work its way into the way we view everything. It may masquerade as some all-loving, nice philosophy but if you follow the trail of the philosophy to its basis, you will find that it is ultimately very offensive to the Personality of God. Consequently, there is no hope of making advancement in realizing our original spiritual nature in a loving relationship with God if we are stuck with an impersonalist ontology - even though we may externally be adopting some personalist spiritualist practices. A common example of what damage impersonal philosophy can do is this: we may think that God is obligated to respond to our spiritual practices. We may unconsciously think "Oh I'm doing all this japa, it's about time God showed up because that's how the formula is supposed to work." In this way, we unconsciously reduce God to an impersonal vending-machine who can be controlled by us by regulated spiritual processes. Naturally this is a very offensive mindset that blocks any hope of developing a meaningful relationship with God. That is one of the dangers. It is subtle, but we eventually notice it.

    Instead, a personalist understands that spiritual advancement is about uncovering a relationship with God. Nobody is obliged to do anything, but rather we gradually develop a spontaneous mood of service and love, which then gives real taste in our relationship with God. This beautiful and most important aspect of the Personality of God is ruthlessly hacked away by the impersonalists. Instead, the idea that WE are God is subtly but surely injected into the ontology of the impersonalist, and that is an ego-trip that is very, very hard to reverse. Lord Chaitanya used to say that a Mayavadi is the greatest offender at the lotus feet of Krishna because he thinks Krishna has material body and thinks himself to be equal to God. That's why He said: Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: if one associates with the Māyāvāda philosophy, his devotional life is doomed.

    If you have an impersonal background then you may have a good deal of un-learning to do, but it will surely be possible if you take up a careful study of Prabhupada's books. The process of Krsna Consciousness that Prabhupada gave us is so simple that it can be practiced by anyone in any condition of life in any location: chanting the Holy Names of God. Why is this the process? Because it is strongly recommended in the scriptures as the only way in this age:
    harer nāma harer nāma
    harer nāmaiva kevalam
    kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva
    nāsty eva gatir anyathā

    TRANSLATION

    In this Age of Kali there is no other means, no other means, no other means for self-realization than chanting the holy name, chanting the holy name, chanting the holy name of Lord Hari.
    Quote Originally Posted by charitra View Post
    '' Can I believe in both? Why can't ISKCON be open and accept the impersonalists?''

    welcome AnrBjotk, yes majority hindus believe in all of the above, sadly some stretch it too far. Most just ignore the divisive arguements put forward by sampradaya buffs or nuts, no offence meant..
    Krishna wouldnt have shown vishva rupa, had he not had any inclination to explain Brahman concept to Arjuna. One entire chapter 11 was about Krishna's universal or cosmic form, which is something like Brahman. Flexibility is the name of the game for overwhelming number of hindus. Iskcon is a wonderful organization, keep going there. Also read upanishads ( if you havent done so already) Namaste.
    Quote Originally Posted by shian View Post
    Iskcon is name of organization. I think you attracted to the devotion of Krsna. In Hindu there is some Vaishnava sect who have Krsna devotion for istadevata. Not only iskcon. You can choose.

    But personally for me, between form and formless, personal and impersonal acctually is same.
    Quote Originally Posted by Believer View Post
    Namaste AB,

    I would just take the best from both worlds. You can go to the ISKCON mandir and do the chanting etc. but not accept everything they have to say. You could go to another Hindu mandir, if there is one in your area, and enjoy their puja too. You could alternate between the two. Some people go to ISKCON because the exuberance there is infectious, but ignore some of their negativity. Every sampradaye has its merits (and some drawbacks), and the trick is to ignore their negativity towards other sampradayes. You cannot change the world. The only person you have control over is yourself!

    Pranam.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaikuntha Bound. View Post
    Dearest AnrBjotk,

    Namaste!

    Srila Prabhupada taught that liberation, as such, consists of entering into a relationship of devotional service with Lord Krsna. The contours of that liberation depend greatly on the nature and personality of Krsna - feeding Krsna prasadam that He enjoys, behaving in a way that is pleasing to Him, acting toward Him as a real person, because He is a real person.

    If you believed that what would set people free was entering into a relationship with a very personal God, you might believe along with Srila Prabhupada that impersonalists were missing the point and that Shankara was objectively wrong.

    Attending an ISKCON temple doesn't mean that you buy everything Srila Prabhupada taught. It could just mean that you like singing and dancing. But it does mean that you will probably continue to hear things that you disagree with.

    As Shian said, there are other Vaishnava groups and teachers, if you feel really strongly drawn to Lord Vishnu. You may want to check out a Vedanta Society, too. You might also want to just visit your nearest Hindu temple. It won't be as exciting as an ISKCON temple on Sunday night, but most have a tangible energy all their own. You can find out if they're having any lectures, and that's a great way to meet others with similar interests.

    Good luck, and if you ever need to talk with someone else who likes ISKCON, but doesn't want to join up, feel free to shoot me a line.

    VB
    Quote Originally Posted by devotee View Post
    Namaste AB,



    I don't think this thread should be in this section as it doesn't speak high of ISKCON but of its narrow-mindedness.

    I love going to ISKCON temples. However, I was shocked when I came into the contact of some ISKCONites on this forum and elsewhere on the internet. I can tell you only these things :

    a) ISKCON doesn't understand Advaita even a bit and therefore, they should stay away from it. Upanishads say that Advaita is not for people who are not fit for it. The easy path is Bhakti Yoga ... Advaita is difficult to understand and also follow.

    b) ISKCON is what it is and they understand what their Guru said to them. So, there is no pint fighting them. You have to decide which path suits you.

    c) ISKCONites unnecessary waste their energy over Advaita-bashing. They can utilise this time effectively on their bhajan kirtans.

    OM
    Quote Originally Posted by Maya3 View Post
    I'm not sure. I'm Advaita myself and I certainly think you can look at it both ways.

    To be honest, the little I know if ISKCON have not been so positive, to me they do seem rather fundamental.

    Where do you live? Maybe there is another alternative? Another temple you could go to?

    Maya
    Namaste, and hare krishna.
    Thank you for all the replies!

    There IS another temple where I live, Norway, but I have no idea what they practice, only that it is a Hindu temple outside of town, and that it is visited almost exclusively by Indians, with almost zero westerners. But perhaps I could stop by.

    What you all have written, the Hare Krishnas and the Advaitins, seems to confirm my beliefs:
    ISKCONs repeat the same thing over and over again, like a protest that shuts everything out: "Advaita is blasphemous to the Lord, advaita is blasphemous to the Lord, advaita is blasphemous to the Lord" etc.
    But it is NOT!
    To say ALL is one is not to mock God or give him a worse name. It is to say, basically what all Hindus say: We all have a piece of Brahman inside of us, and to attain it, is the goal of life. "The aim of life is to know thyself".
    Advaita is not dangerous or hedonistic. It is looking at God by closing yr eyes, by looking within.

    But, I still do not understand why ISKCONs cant just accept Advaita like they, say they, accept Islam, and certainly, Gurdijeff...

    Namaste! I hope you all will help me out with other threds on this site!
    <3

  10. Post Re: Question about criticism of "the Impersonalists"

    Quote Originally Posted by AnrBjotk View Post
    Namaste, and hare krishna.
    Thank you for all the replies!

    There IS another temple where I live, Norway, but I have no idea what they practice, only that it is a Hindu temple outside of town, and that it is visited almost exclusively by Indians, with almost zero westerners. But perhaps I could stop by.

    What you all have written, the Hare Krishnas and the Advaitins, seems to confirm my beliefs:
    ISKCONs repeat the same thing over and over again, like a protest that shuts everything out: "Advaita is blasphemous to the Lord, advaita is blasphemous to the Lord, advaita is blasphemous to the Lord" etc.
    But it is NOT!
    To say ALL is one is not to mock God or give him a worse name. It is to say, basically what all Hindus say: We all have a piece of Brahman inside of us, and to attain it, is the goal of life. "The aim of life is to know thyself".
    Advaita is not dangerous or hedonistic. It is looking at God by closing yr eyes, by looking within.

    But, I still do not understand why ISKCONs cant just accept Advaita like they, say they, accept Islam, and certainly, Gurdijeff...

    Namaste! I hope you all will help me out with other threds on this site!
    <3
    Dear AnrBjotk Prabhu,

    Just to let you know that ISKCON does not make up anything. ISKCON simply repeats the words of Krishna, Lord Chaitanya, and Vaisnava acaryas.

    So prabhu you want to know why ISKCON says:"Advaita is blasphemous to the Lord"? OK I will tell you why. Firstly Advaita says the impersonal Brahman is Absolute Truth and the personal form is subordinate.
    But take a look at this:
    Taittirīya Upaniṣad [2.5] states:
    ātmānandamayaḥ ānanda ātmā brahma pucchaṁ pratiṣṭhā
    “The Supreme Lord is full of ecstasy. The impersonal Brahman is His bodily effulgence. He is the source of Brahman.
    brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhāham
    amṛtasyāvyayasya ca
    śāśvatasya ca dharmasya
    sukhasyaikāntikasya ca
    "And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness, and which is immortal, imperishable and eternal." [Bhagavad-gītā 14.27]
    In the Katha Upanishad (2.2.13) there is the important verse; nityo nityanam chetanas chetananam eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman: “He is the supreme eternally conscious person who maintains all other living entities(spirit soul).”
    Katha Upanishad (2.3.8-9) wherein it says: “Beyond the Brahmajyoti (nirguna or formless Brahman of the monist) there is the Great Purusha viz., Purushottama God who is all-pervading (as the Brahmajyoti) and without any empirical attributes, but having sat-chit-ananda--transcendental embodiment. He who realizes this Purushottama-tattva is finally liberated. Attaining a spiritual body he renders eternal service to the Purushottama [Supreme Being]. The Transcendental Personality of Godhead is beyond the purview of occult vision. But He can be apprehended through a pure transparent mind imbibed with intuitive wisdom born out of unalloyed devotional practices in the very core of one’s own unstinted heart--those who have really got such a vision have gained final beatitude.”
    Brahma-samhita (5.40)“I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord who is endowed with great power. The glowing effulgence of His transcendental form is the impersonal Brahman, which is absolute, complete and unlimited, and which displays the varieties of countless planets with their different opulences in millions and millions of universes.”
    Govinda, is the primeval Lord, whose effulgence is the source of the nondifferentiated Brahman mentioned in the Upanishads, being differentiated from the infinity of glories of the mundane universe appears as the indivisible, infinite, limitless, truth. (Brahma Samhita 5.40)
    And Advaita defines the spirit soul as Supreme. and therefore they think that the Self is also Narayan. They say aham brahmasmi(I am Brahman). But yes we are Brahman. I am spirit. It is said that one should understand that he is Brahman, spirit soul. One should know that he is not matter; he is pure soul. Mayavadi philosophers misinterpret the aham brahmasmi to mean, “I am the Supreme Brahman” and “I am identical with the Lord.” This kind of false conception, in which one thinks himself the supreme enjoyer, is a kind of illusion. Mayavadi philosophers, they think, “Now I’ve realized that I am not this body, I am not matter, I am spirit soul, so now I have become Narayana. I have become the Supreme.” But no, that is also mistake. When you realize that “Supreme is the Supreme Brahman, Parabrahman, I am part and parcel of the Supreme, I am also Brahman, but I am not the Supreme Brahman, therefore my business is to serve Parabrahman.” We can take the example of the hand. The hand may realize it is part of the body. But full realization is when the hand realizes that is the part of the body and selflessly serves the body(like maintaining the body).
    We have got to understand that we are the drop of water and Krishna is the vast ocean. The drop of water and the vast ocean are identical in a way that they are both water. Similarly, we and Krishna are both Brahman. But the vast ocean and drop of water differs largely in quantity. Similarly, I am the small Brahman who is a spirit soul and Krishna is the Supreme Brahman. <<<This is Achintya Bheda Abheda(simultaneous oneness and difference), the philosophy Lord Chaitanya preached and ISKCON follows.

    Now Advaitins also say Krishna has material body and is in maya.<<<This is the huge offense. That is why Lord Chaitanya used to say that a Mayavadi is the greatest offender at the lotus feet of Krishna. Krishna and his pastimes, body, soul, names etc. are all same and identical. There is no difference. So saying that Krishna's body is material and in maya is same as saying Krishna is material and in maya.

    Also those who read Padma Purana will never get attracted to Mayavada philosophy. In the Padma Purana there is a conversation between Lord Shiva and Parvati and Lord Shiva says:
    Padma Purana 6.236.7
    mayavadam asac chastram pracchannam bauddham uchyate
    mayaiva kalpitam devi kalau brahmana rupina
    Mayavada or Advaita philosophy is an impious, wicked belief and against all the conclusions of the Vedas. It is only covered Buddhism. My dear Parvati, in Kali-Yuga I assume the form of a brahmana (Adi Shankara) and teach this imagined philosophy.

    Padma Purana 6.236.8-9
    apartham sruti-vakyanam darsayan loka-garhitam
    sva-karma-rupam tyajya tvam atraiva pratipadyate
    sarva-karma paribhrastair vaidharma tvam tad ucyate
    paresa-jiva-paraikyam maya tu pratipadyate
    "This mayavada advaita philosophy preached by me (in form of Adi Shankara) deprives the words of the holy texts of their actual meaning and thus it is condemned in the world. It recommends the renunciation of one's own duties, since those who have fallen from their duties say that the giving up of duties is religiosity. In this way, I have also falsely propounded the identity of the Supreme Lord and the individual soul."

    Padma Purana 6.236.10
    brahmanas caparam rupam nirgunam vaksyate maya
    sarva-svam jagato py asya mohanartham kalu yuge
    "In order to bewilder the atheists, in Kali-yuga, I describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead Lord Gauranga Krishna to be without any form and without qualities."

    Padma Purana 6.236.11
    vedante tu maha-sastrera mayavadam avaidikam
    mayaiva vaksyate devi jagatam nasha-karanat
    "Similarly, in explaning Vedanta mahashastra, I described the same non-scriptural and inauspicious mayavada philosophy in order to mislead the entire population toward atheism by denying the personal form of my beloved Lord."
    Also in Varaha Purana Lord Visnu instructs Siva saying:
    esa moham srjamy asu yo janan mohayisyati
    tvam ca rudra maha-baho moha-sastrani karaya
    O mighty-armed Siva, please write books filled with lies, and thus bewilder the people.

    atathyani vitathyani darsayasva maha-bhuja
    prakasam kuru catmanam aprakasam ca mam kuru
    O mighty-armed one, please preach a collection of lies. Place yourself in the forefront, and conceal Me.
    The Mayavadis use very sophisticated world jugglery to try to establish their false conclusion. Those who are not learned in the Vedic wisdom can easily be razzle-dazzled or misled by Mayavadi philosophy. Mayavadi is mayayapahrta-jnana: "Their knowledge has been taken away by maya." This doctrine of Mayavada is so harmful to the jiva that Lord Chaitanya Himself has warned us by saying,"Mayavada bhasya sunile haya sarva nasa." -- "One who hears the commentaries of the Mayavadis, will ruin his spiritual life." So if Lord Chaitanya who is Krishna Himself has classified a Mayavadi as greatest offender then who are we to say that Advaita is or not blasphemous!

    Hope this cleared your doubts. Hari Bol!

    Your humble servant.
    Last edited by GauraHari; 25 May 2012 at 06:15 PM. Reason: mistakes
    Chant...
    Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare
    Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare

    ...and be happy!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 08 April 2013, 11:27 AM
  2. A new philosophy?
    By upsydownyupsy mv ss in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 25 June 2011, 06:51 AM
  3. Gunas and the Brain differences
    By atanu in forum Canteen
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05 August 2010, 11:33 PM
  4. Svetasvatara Upanishad
    By soham3 in forum Upanishads & Aranyakas
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 27 April 2008, 03:31 AM
  5. Some questions on HK
    By Yogkriya in forum Hare Krishna (ISKCON)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06 August 2007, 02:03 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
  •