• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God cannot have Form?

Onkara

Well-Known Member
That's terrible! I also experienced such fanaticism. I think it is due to a lack of leadership.
I mean this respectfully....

Have you ever worried that you might have been brain washed?

By brain washed I mean that you cling to a specific way of thinking and believing because you believe that that is all you can believe given the circumstances you are in personally?
 

I-Ching

Aspiring to Transcendence
I mean this respectfully....

Have you ever worried that you might have been brain washed?

By brain washed I mean that you cling to a specific way of thinking and believing because you believe that that is all you can believe given the circumstances you are in personally?

That's ridiculous! How can refer to process of bhakti-yoga as brain washing. Prabhupada said our brains are very dirty and they need a good wash :)
 

I-Ching

Aspiring to Transcendence
It does not matter a bit as what you consider standard. The following translation is not true translation of:

Isa Up.

sambhuutiM cha vinaashaM cha yastadvedobhaya{\m+} saha .
vinaashena mR^ityuM tiirtvaa sambhuutyaa.amR^itamashnute .. 14..

One should know perfectly the Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa and His transcendental name, form, qualities and pastimes ---

It's not what I consider standard its what the Brahmins of Venkateswara consider as the standard.
 

Onkara

Well-Known Member
It's not what I consider standard its what the Brahmins of Venkateswara consider as the standard.

Now I think you are just enjoying a good debate. ;)
Even you are allowed to open a Sanskrit-English dictionary. Just tell yourself it is to help you understand what the Brahmins want you to think.
 

Paraprakrti

Custom User
I mean this respectfully....

Have you ever worried that you might have been brain washed?

By brain washed I mean that you cling to a specific way of thinking and believing because you believe that that is all you can believe given the circumstances you are in personally?

No. We default to this position because the impersonalist alternative is untenable. Taking a verse and showing how it can be translated in such a way devoid of the personal attributes of God isn't going to satisfy anyone who has studied and understands the philosophy of the Bhakti perspective. Even if the word "sambhhutim," in and of itself, does not mean the Supreme Personality of Godhead, His form, name, pastimes, etc., it does in the context of that verse and especially in the greater context of sound Vaisnava conclusions based upon a legitimate Sampradaya. I am no Sanskrit scholar, but the same time I was introduced to Srila Prabhupada's book, I was also introduced to Paramahamsa Yogananda's teachings, and I decided to contrast and compare. I also threw in a (I believe) "penguins classic" version of the Gita for good measure. The reason us "Hare Krishnas" (as we're often called) have settled on this particular school of thought is because we have found it to be the best in terms of its philosophical arguments.
 

I-Ching

Aspiring to Transcendence
Now I think you are just enjoying a good debate. ;)
Even you are allowed to open a Sanskrit-English dictionary. Just tell yourself it is to help you understand what the Brahmins want you to think.

sambhūtim means God there is nothing wrong with Prabhupada's translation. It is the impersonalists who misdefine God to be some kind of impersonal energy. If there is energy there must be an energetic.

What example can you give of energy that has no source?
 

I-Ching

Aspiring to Transcendence
Better that they kick out all those rascals pretending to be diksa guru successors to Srila Prabhupada.

I think that would be a bit extreme. Although i think that the majority are not Guru's in the real sense of the term. I do consider someone like Radhanath Swami as a bonafida Guru.

The Vedic process is to follow Guru, Sadhu and Sastra. You can't just follow Sastra and Sadhu. It is not possible to for Srila Prabhupada to give you practical training unless you have some means to communicate with him. You have to be able to "inquire submissively". What if on the battlefield of Kuruksetra Arjuna had simply had a copy of Bhagavad-Gita, in his state of mind would Sastra have been able to help Him? We all need personal Guidance especially when the mind is disturbed.
 

Onkara

Well-Known Member
sambhūtim means God there is nothing wrong with Prabhupada's translation. It is the impersonalists who misdefine God to be some kind of impersonal energy. If there is energy there must be an energetic.

What example can you give of energy that has no source?

I agree. Although, I feel inclined to add that the generalisation of "impersonalists", should be used carefully as if it is used to negate the other philosophy, then the mind has already made a decision. In other words the mind is closed.

To answer the question, I see that the energetic is not different to the energy.

The two are seen as separable at the level of the empirical individual.

It doesn't matter which names we use, however I will explain in the terminology of the philosophy which I feel explains this well:

Shiva is the divine source, Shakti is His energy. Together they are one, but may appear to be two. As the Shiva does not change, yet all change that happens is due to Shiva as Shakti (the energetic as you term it).

The inability to understand this, is due to Shakti Maya, His own energy, which through His will conceals His unity as diversity.

The universe is real, as Shiva-Shakti is real. But it as Shakti (energy in your terms) it is subject to change. Shiva is not subject to change, this is why there appears to be two when in fact there is only one.

When the empirical individual comes to recognise Shiva s/he too will come to know their nature and their Self (Atma).
 

I-Ching

Aspiring to Transcendence
I agree. Although, I feel inclined to add that the generalisation of "impersonalists", should be used carefully as if it is used to negate the other philosophy, then the mind has already made a decision. In other words the mind is closed.
I do negate this philosophy

To answer the question, I see that the energetic is not different to the energy.

When energy is influenced by Maya it see itself is non-different from the energetic, due to the lack of desire to serve the energetic, but to try and imitate the energetic's position.
 

Onkara

Well-Known Member
I do negate this philosophy



When energy is influenced by Maya it see itself is non-different from the energetic, due to the lack of desire to serve the energetic, but to try and imitate the energetic's position.

Who or what is doing the negating and where does that stand in the tattvas of your system?

There is only One Lord, so the energy and energetic cannot be two. Maya is an effect of the energy (which is the same as the energetic Lord), so it cannot influence or blind itself. If Maya influenced energy then it is influencing the Lord too, which could not be possible. Energy has no desire or lack, energy is the will of the Lord.
 
Last edited:

I-Ching

Aspiring to Transcendence
Who or what is doing the negating and where does that stand in the tattvas of your system?

There is only One Lord, so the energy and energetic cannot be two. Maya is an effect of the energy (which is the same as the energetic Lord), so it cannot influence or blind itself. If Maya influenced energy then it is influencing the Lord too, which could not be possible. Energy has no desire or lack, energy is the will of the Lord.

This going round in circles. We've already been through this.
 

Onkara

Well-Known Member
This going round in circles. We've already been through this.

Then accept it, be liberated whilst living ;)

I am jesting of course, but I feel we have to accept each others view from the perspective of our systems or investigate further with an open mind. :)
 
Last edited:

atanu

Member
Premium Member
The reason us "Hare Krishnas" (as we're often called) have settled on this particular school of thought is because we have found it to be the best in terms of its philosophical arguments.

No one questions the Hare Krishnas when they replace saMbhUti with Supremee personality of Godhead and his past-times. It is their philosophy.

But that does not mean that we should forget the meaning of asaMbhUti and saMbhUti and replace those words with Hare Krishna words.The verse in question is the key point of Hinduism that the manifest and unmanifest, when worshipped as one, leads to immoratlity. If one of them is worshipped in isolation, the result is darkness.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
sambhūtim means God there is nothing wrong with Prabhupada's translation.

Are you joking? Do you understand what the following verse is saying?

Isha Upanishad

12. andhaM tamaH pravisHanti ye'sambhûtimupâsate,

It says that one who worships sambhUtim (sambhûtimupâsate) enters into a blinding darkness. So, do you mean to say that by worshipping God one will enter dark blindness?

I Ching, please desist from altering the meanings of Upanishads. You are not a sanskrit scholar so kindly have some respect for the original sanskrit scholars w3ho have translated the upanishad. And I can show you several translations which mean as below:
12) Into a blind darkness they enter who worship only the unmanifested prakriti; but into a greater darkness they enter who worship the manifested Hiranyagarbha.

13) One thing, they say, is obtained from the worship of the manifested; another, they say, from the worship of the unmanifested. Thus we have heard from the wise who taught us this.

14) He who knows that both the unmanifested prakriti and the manifested Hiranyagarbha should be worshipped together, overcomes death by the worship of Hiranyagarbha and obtains immortality through devotion to prakriti.
....................................

Kindly note that Sri Prabhupada's translation is not incorrect in essence. It is perfectly OK for his school. But that does not mean that other gurus teach wrongly.
 
Last edited:

atanu

Member
Premium Member
In case some say that the above translation is from impersonalists (whatever that means), I paste three other translations of the verses in question (many more translations can be checked on-line).

Sri Aurobindo
12. Into a blind darkness they enter who follow after the Non-Birth, they as if into a greater darkness who devote themselves to the Birth alone.

13. Other, verily, it is said, is that which comes by the Birth, other that which comes by the Non-Birth; this is the lore we have received from the wise who revealed That to our understanding.

14. He who knows That as both in one, the Birth and the dissolution of Birth, by the dissolution crosses beyond death and by the Birth enjoys Immortality

Sanderson Beck
Into blind darkness enter those who follow non-becoming;
into greater darkness enter those who follow becoming.
It is distinct, they say, from becoming.
It is distinct, they say, from non-becoming.
So have we heard from the wise who explained it to us.
Becoming and destruction, whoever knows the two together
with destruction passes over death,
with becoming attains immortality.
Swami Paramananda
XII
They fall into blind darkness who worship the Unmanifested and they fall into greater darkness who worship the manifested.
XIII
By the worship of the Unmanifested one end is attained; by the worship of the manifested, another. Thus we have heard from the wise men who taught us this.
XIV
He who knows at the same time both the Unmanifested (the cause of manifestation) and the destructible or manifested, he crosses over death through knowledge of the destructible and attains immortality through knowledge of the First Cause (Unmanifested).

...........................................................

IMO, to claim that only one particular translation that one follows is the correct one and all other translations are untenable, is like the claim in another thread 'My religion is the only right religion'.

Hinduism is different from Abrahamic religions in its teaching that the unseen source and the manifest glory must not be separated or must be worshipped and understood together.
 
Last edited:

Paraprakrti

Custom User
I think that would be a bit extreme. Although i think that the majority are not Guru's in the real sense of the term. I do consider someone like Radhanath Swami as a bonafida Guru.

Radhanath Swami was not authorized by Srila Prabhupada to become diksa guru.

The Vedic process is to follow Guru, Sadhu and Sastra. You can't just follow Sastra and Sadhu. It is not possible to for Srila Prabhupada to give you practical training unless you have some means to communicate with him. You have to be able to "inquire submissively". What if on the battlefield of Kuruksetra Arjuna had simply had a copy of Bhagavad-Gita, in his state of mind would Sastra have been able to help Him? We all need personal Guidance especially when the mind is disturbed.

By your logic, many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples can't be his disciples since they never received "practical training" from him in person. Also, the entire GBC and voted-in gurus have not received such training in over 30 years.

I Ching, have you read The Final Order?
 

Paraprakrti

Custom User
Sri Isopanisad, 12

WORD for WORD
andham--ignorance; tamah--darkness; pravisanti--enter into; ye--those who; asambhutim--demigods; upasate--worship; tatah--than that; bhuyah--still more; iva--like that; te--those; tamah--darkness; ye--who; u--also; sambhutyam--in the Absolute; ratah--engaged.

TRANSLATION
Those who are engaged in the worship of demigods enter into the darkest region of ignorance, and still more so do the worshipers of the impersonal Absolute.

PURPORT
The Sanskrit word asambhuti refers to those who have no independent existence. Sambhuti is the Absolute personality of Godhead, who is absolutely independent of everything. In Bhagavad-gita, the Absolute personality of Godhead, Sri Krishna, states:

na me viduh sura-ganah
prabhavam na maharsayah
aham adir hi devanam
maharsinam ca sarvasah

"Neither the hosts of demigods nor the great sages know My origin, for in every respect, I am the source of the demigods and the sages." (Bg. 10.2) Thus Krishna is the origin of the powers delegated to demigods, great sages and mystics. Although they are endowed with great powers, it is very difficult for them to know how Krishna Himself appears by His own internal potency in the form of a man.

All philosophers and great rsis, or mystics, try to distinguish the Absolute from the relative by their tiny brain power. This can only help them reach the point of negating relativity without realizing any positive trace of the Absolute. Definition of the Absolute by negation is not complete. Such negative definitions lead one to create a concept of his own; thus one imagines that the Absolute must be formless and without qualities. Negative qualities are simply the reversals of positive qualities and are therefore also relative. By conceiving of the Absolute in this way one can at the utmost reach the impersonal effulgence of God, known as Brahman, but he cannot make further progress to Bhagavan, the personality of Godhead.

Such mental speculators do not know that Krishna is the Absolute personality of Godhead, that the impersonal Brahman is the glaring effulgence of His transcendental body and that Paramatma, the Supersoul, is His all-pervading representation. Nor do they know that Krishna has His eternal form with its transcendental qualities of eternal bliss and knowledge. The dependent demigods and great sages imperfectly consider Him to be a powerful demigod, and they consider the Brahman effulgence to be the Absolute Truth. Krishna's devotees who surrender unto Him in unalloyed devotion, however, can know that He is the Absolute person and that everything emanates from Him. Such devotees continuously render loving service unto Krishna, the fountainhead of everything.

In Bhagavad-gita it is also said (Bg. 7.20) that only bewildered persons, driven by a strong desire for sense gratification, worship the demigods for the satisfaction of temporary problems. Temporary relief from certain difficulties by the greatness of some demigod is a solution sought only by the unintelligent. Since the living being is materially entangled, he has to be relieved from material bondage entirely to attain permanent relief on the spiritual plane where eternal bliss, life and knowledge exist. It is also stated in Bhagavad-gita (Bg. 7.23) that the worshipers of the demigods can go to the planets of the demigods. The moon worshipers can go to the moon, the sun worshipers to the sun, etc. Modern scientists are now venturing to the moon with the help of rockets, but this is not really a new attempt. With their advanced consciousness, human beings are naturally inclined to travel in outer space and to reach other planets--either by spaceships, mystic powers or demigod worship. In the Vedic scripures, it is said that one can reach other planets by any one of these three ways, but the most common way is by worshiping the demigod presiding over that particular planet. However, all planets in the material universe are temporary residences; the only permanent planets are the Vaikunthalokas. These are found in the spiritual sky, and the personality of Godhead Himself dominates them. As stated in Bhagavad-gita:

abrahma-bhuvanal lokah
punar avartino 'rjuna
mam upetya tu kaunteya
punar janma na vidyate

"From the highest planet in the material world down to the lowest, all are places of misery wherein repeated birth and death take place. But one who attains My abode, O son of Kunti, never takes birth again." (Bg. 8.16)

Sri Isopanisad points out that one remains in the darkest region of the universe by hovering over the material planets by one means or another. The whole universe is covered by the gigantic material elements, just as a coconut is covered by a husk. Since its covering is airtight, the darkness within is dense, and therefore suns and moons are required for illumination. Outside the universe is the vast and unlimited brahmajyoti expansion which is filled with Vaikunthalokas. The highest planet in the brahmajyoti is the Krsnaloka, or Goloka Vrndavana, where the Supreme personality of Godhead, Sri Krishna Himself, resides. Lord Sri Krishna never leaves this Krsnaloka. Although He dwells there with His eternal associates, He is omnipresent throughout the complete material and spiritual cosmic manifestations. This fact has already been explained in Mantra Four. The Lord is present everywhere, just like the sun, yet He is situated in one place, just as the sun is situated in its own undeviating orbit.

The problems of life cannot be solved simply by going to the moon. There are many pseudo-worshipers who become religionists only for the sake of name and fame. Such pseudo-religionists do not wish to get out of this universe and reach the spiritual sky. They only want to maintain the status quo in the material world under the garb of worshiping the Lord. The atheists and impersonalists lead such foolish pseudo-religionists into the darkest regions by preaching the cult of atheism. The atheist directly denies the existence of the Supreme personality of Godhead, and the impersonalists support the atheists by stressing the impersonal aspect of the Supreme Lord. Thus far we have not come across any mantra in Sri Isopanisad in which the Supreme personality of Godhead is denied. It is said that He can run faster than anyone. Those who are running after other planets are certainly persons, and if the Lord can run faster than all of them, how can He be considered impersonal? The impersonal conception of the Suprme Lord is another form of ignorance arising from an imperfect conception of the Absolute Truth.

The ignorant pseudo-religionists and the manufacturers of so-called incarnations who directly violate the Vedic injunctions are liable to enter into the darkest region of the universe because they mislead those who follow them. These impersonalists generally pose themselves as incarnations of God to the foolish who have no knowledge of Vedic wisdom. If such foolish men have any knowledge at all, it is more dangerous in their hands than ignorance itself. Such impersonalists do not even worship the demigods according to the scriptural recommendations. In the scriptures there are recommendations for worshiping demigods under certain circumstances, but at the same time these scriptures state that there is normally no need for this. In Bhagavad-gita it is clearly stated (Bg. 7.23) that the results derived from worshiping the demigods are not permanent. Since the entire material universe is not permanent, whatever is achieved within the darkness of material existence is also impermanent. The question is how toobtain real and permanent life.

The Lord states that as soon as one reaches Him by devotional service--which is the one and only way to approach the personality of Godhead--one attains complete freedom from the bondage of birth and death. In other words, the path of salvation from the material clutches fully depends on the principles of knowledge and detachment. The pseudo-religionists have neither knowledge nor detachment from material affairs, for most of them want to live in the golden shackles of material bondage under the shadow of altruistic and philanthropic activities and in the guise of religious principles. By a false display of religious sentiments, they present a show of devotional service while indulging in all sorts of immoral activities. In this way they pass as spiritual masters and devotees of God. Such violators of religious principles have no respect for the authoritative acaryas, the holy teachers in the strict disciplic succession. To mislead the people in general, they themselves become so-called acaryas, but do nt even follow the principles of the acaryas.

These rogues are the most dangerous elements in human society. Because there is no religious government, they escape punishment by the law of the state. They cannot, however, escape the law of the Supreme, who has clearly declared in Bhagavad-gita (Bg. 16.19-20) that envious demons in the garb of religious propagandists shall be thrown into the darkest regions of hell. Sri Isopanisad confirms that these pseudo-religionists are heading toward the most obnoxious place in the universe after the completion of their spiritual master business, which they conduct simply for sense gratification.
 
Top