"The followers of Sankara argue that Brahman is consciousness itself, with no awareness of self or other things. But this is disproved here. This awareness of self in both the Lord and the jiva is not the material ahankara (false ego) which arises from the mahat-tattva. That is a meaningless proposal, since the material ahankara disappears during dissolution of the universe. (so ‘kamayata shows that the Lord had an identity before manifestation of ahankara)."
Can you explain to me how it is that consciousness can be manifest "with no awareness of self or other things." I am not understanding this. To my thinking, consciousness, means self-awareness. How can consciousness not include self-awareness? It doesn't even make any sense to me. How can there be consciousness without self-awareness? What kind of consciousness is that? I am asking this because I am thinking that maybe I do not understand the proper use of the word "consciousness." Sometimes this happens where words are often used interchangeably such as heart/mind and a Westerner does not rightly understand clearly. I wish to make sure that I have the proper definition of consciousness.
Is this meant in terms of like a an animal or something that has consciousness but no self-awareness? I am not so sure that animals don't have self-awareness. Is this the Vedic understanding, that animals are not self-aware or trees, etc. Can you please set me straight on the definitions here.
Srila Prabhupada based his BG on Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary for the most part, and he dedicated his BG to the acarya. What I had written above is taken from the acarya's commentary.
For the Advaitavadis, Brahman is mere consciousness and only Brahman exists. There is no other. So when there is none other, what is there to be aware of? If we say we are conscious of something, then that something should exist apart from us so that we can be aware of it. But since there is nothing else apart from Brahman, there is no awareness. They rule out self awareness too, of Brahman being aware of itself. Thats why it is said their conception of Brahman is as good as dead matter, which is not aware of anything or itself.
me a lot to understand things much more clearly. I don't know where I would have ever been able to learn this otherwise. Thank you very much for your taking the time to clarify this for me. That is very kind of you.
Dear Lilia,
We humans try to test everything on touchstone of reasoning and trying to always see the both sides of the coin, but what to do when it's not a coin!! Still like fools we tend to assume it as a coin and reason it. Consciousness means to see everything happening as Krishna's leela, His wish, His mercy and to act with Krishna in accord to this leela (even if this leela goes against your will). As per my knowledge self-awareness is no where closer to Krishna Consciousness. Self-awareness means responding to your own physical and emotional needs (animals do have that but lesser than humans), where as being in Krishna’s consciousness is to be absorbed in Him and you get oblivious to your physical/emotional needs. All you care is about Krishna. Such a person is rarely witnessed.
Every living matter in this universe has consciousness, but it is limited according to the type of species. Humans have the most advanced type which surpasses self-awareness and can connect directly to Krishna. So consciousness in it’s entirety is to be absorbed in Krishna. It is like you’re an employee in some company and you see only the CEO doing everything, even the slightest effort made by a worker on physical grounds you see it as CEO’s wish. So Krishna is the CEO, the Supreme of this universe and you’re an employee, His servant. I hope this helps you a bit to understand what it means like to be Krishna Conscious. Stay away from dry philosophy as much as possible because we are not adept and can fall down anytime. In my life I've speculated enough over impersonal dry philosophy and through hard times learnt to worship Krishna as Supreme (He helps you in every way). I know confusion will always arise as you face this world or read something like this, but tell yourself to serve Krishna no matter what.
important to understand the philosophy of Krishna Consciousness in terms of how the impersonalist philosophy fails to represent the truth? I think it is important because it helps us to fully understand the greatness of KC philosophy. Srila Prabhupada constantly talks about it in his purports to the BG and SB. He says how the impersonal philosophy fails to represent the full truth.
In my inquiry, I wanted to make sure that I rightly understood the meaning of consciousness and what was being said so as not to be lead into any confusion. I am finding that this is very important in order for clear understanding to be established. And, I feel quite satisfied by the response. This helps me to understand more the limited conception of impersonalism which in turn acts to purify my intelligence. As such, i am extremely grateful.
In talking to others about KC philosophy, one has to be knowledgeable of the impersonal understanding. I am not saying that one should study this philosophy. But, all I am saying, is that now a days, impersonalism is prevalent everywhere and it is important to understand exactly what it is that they think. If one doesn't know this, then how can one really fully understand the glories of KC philosophy?
Yes it is important to listen to all the words Srila Prabhupada says.
"He says how the impersonal philosophy fails to represent the full truth." -- short of the full story
vs.
"fails to represent the truth" - a lie
Im not trying to be critical, I see this a lot actually and just stopping here to make an example of how easy it is to get a different spin on something.
Thank you for pointing this out to me. This is very much appreciated. This illustrates how important it is to chose one's words very carefully. Yes, there is a big difference between saying that the impersonal conception of God fails to represent the truth vs. that the impersonal conception of God fails to represent the full truth.
As we know, the Brahman conception or impersonal conception of God is a form of God-realization. This was my intended meaning, but I can see now how my words can be interpreted as being false.
This post made me stop and pause and contemplate some of the glories of Krishna Consciousness philosophy. And so I felt inspired to write this. I think it would be nice to start a forum topic completely centered around this subject. The subject matter is endless (being non-different from Krishna) and opens the doors for a lot of discussion.
I have taken this from the purport of SB 3.7.5 by Srila Prabhupada. One of the glories of Krishna Consciousness philosophy is that our condition in material existence is explained so nicely. It is not that we are God. If we were God, how is it that we have become illusioned by nescience? If so, then nescience is greater than God. The following makes this point beautifuly:
"The living entity is mentioned in Bhagavad-gītā (7.5) as parā prakṛti, and in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa he is mentioned as the parā śakti. He is part and parcel of the Supreme Lord as potency and not as the potent. The potent can exhibit many potencies, but the potency cannot equal the potent at any stage. One potency may be overcome by another potency, but to the potent, all potencies are under control. The jīva potency, or the kṣetrajña-śakti of the Lord, has the tendency to be overpowered by the external potency, avidyā-karma-saḿjñā, and in this way he is placed in the awkward circumstances of material existence. The living entity cannot be forgetful of his real identity unless influenced by the avidyā potency. Because the living entity is prone to the influence of the avidyā potency, he can never equal the supreme potent."
It is useful to have some underfstanding of other philosophical systems. The more I learn about other religions the more I appreciate devotional service to Krishna.
Having said that it can lead to a little confusion to consider conflicting philosophies can't it.
The points made here are well taken. We should not read mayavada or any other useless philosophy that takes our attention from Krsna. At the same time as Lilia pointed out, we can glimpse thru them to have some basic understanding and how they think. If we go deep into them and try to understand their pros and cons, then it will lead to confusion, as Antony points out. Lord Caitanya had warned that listening to Mayavada will doom us.
It is safe for us to read what our acaryas say about them instead of reading some book by a Mayavadi or a regular scholar. Srila Prabhupada's Caitanya Caritamrta has lots of points refuting Mayavada. And his pranama mantra proclaims his mission - to deliver everyone from Mayavada and Sunyavada. So we can read how our acaryas made points against Mayavada so that it can weed out any traces of it within our minds, and also to get an understanding of the philosophy and thereby understand the true glories of Krishna consciousness.
Krsna says in BG 2.16 that the seers of truth have concluded there is no permanence for the body and no change for the soul. And how did they conclude this? After studying the natures of both - not just one sided. A similar point is made in Isopanisad mantra 11 - only one who learns the process of avidya (nescience) and that of knowledge (vidya) side by side can transcend the influence of repeated birth and death. So one who is inclined to read should have some basic understanding of what is not Krsna consciousness that would help them to weed out the useless things to keep our focus on Krsna.
And the Bhagavatam makes a beautiful point when the Nagapatnis pray to Krsna in 10.16.43 that the Lord sanctions the opposing views of different philosophies, and He is the power upholding expressed ideas and the words that express them. So with that mind when we read the refutation of Mayavada by our acaryas we can still maintain our focus on Krsna. Again let us not go to the extreme and say we can read whatever we want by whoever wrote it because it is Krsna who sanctioned the opposing views. Doing that will make us forget Krsna.
The context in which what I wrote appears when the five subjects of Bhagavad gita are being discussed. Of these five, only the jiva and isvara have consciousness. And then it is explained how the two are eternally individual - the soul always being aware of its constitutional position as servant of Krsna, and how Krsna is supremely conscious. This is then differentiated against how the Mayavadis view Brahman.
love this post. It is so perfect in the way that you integrate all of the points so beautifully with reference to scripture. Just reading that made me very happy; it is full of knowledge.
I don't read other philosophies. The only thing that I read is BG and SB. But, in reading them, sometimes I don't really understand what SP is saying in reference to Mayavadi philosophy, due to not having a solid understanding of what Mayavadi philosophy is, not that I want to become a scholar or anything. I know that Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to listen to Mayavadi philosophers speak their nonsense. So, I do not inquire or read anything from them; I simply am trying to direct my inquiries to Vaisnava's that are very much established in knowledge. That is why I ask questions for clarification so that I can understand.
This is a comment in response to BG Introduction - 5 posted below.
The reasons behind the appearance of Krishna tend to be debated amongst certain circles. As far as what I know, in the BG, Krishna says Himself that He appears to lighten the world from the burden of irreligious persons. Yet, still, I have heard that this response is not conclusive. Some persons say that Krishna appeared to attract the conditioned souls by His pastimes. Others say Krishna appeared simply to protect His devotees.
I know the first explanation given by Krishna is definite, being that Krishna says so in the BG. But, how am I to make out these other explanations. Just why did Krishna appear? And what do the authorities say on this matter?
Krsna says in BG 4th chapter that 'yada yada hi dharmasya, glanir bhavati bharata' that He appears when there is dharmasya glani - religion or dharma gets distorted. And He next says He appears to protect the sadhus and destroy the wrong doers (duskrta). And He establishes dharma. This is what Krsna definitely states in BG.
Now if we try to understand this we should naturally think why should Krsna appear to lighten the world from the burden of the irreligious. He could comfortably do it from His abode - just turn on a switch to bring about floods, or fire or drought or spread a disease. And the saintly kings are the representatives of the Lord, and so they can see to the establishment of religious principles. Just like Pariksit chastised a cow killer. And when Krsna appeared in Dvapara yuga, there were still saintly kings like Yudhishtira, Pariksit and others. Of course there was Kamsa, Jarasandha and many many demons too. But religious principles were not as bad as they are today. Still Krsna appeared. Why?
The acaryas comment: Krsna appears because He performs feats which are very difficult for others to do. He appears in every age for delivering His dedicated devotees, whose hearts are bursting with longing and suffering due to their not seeing His form; for destroying the evil-minded persons like Ravana, Kamsa and Kesi, who give suffering to His devotees, and who cannot be killed by anyone except Him; and for establishing in a firm way, the supreme dharma of pure bhakti-yoga of meditating on Him, worshipping, serving Him and singing about Him, which cannot be instituted by anyone but Him. Lord Sri Krsna descends for the specific purpose of mitigating the anxieties of the pure devotees, who are very anxious to see Him in His original Vrndavana pastimes. Therefore, the prime purpose of the Krsna avatara is to satisfy His unalloyed devotees.
And yes, He appears to attract the conditioned souls by His pastimes. This is confirmed in BG in the verse that immediately follows the reasons of His appearance. In BG 4.9 He says those who understand the tattva or truth about His divine pastimes and appearance, will immediately go back to Him.
So all these are nicely revealed in the scriptures and mercifully explained by our acaryas.
This is a wonderful reply! Thanks a lot Radhikesh.
Still, I have some more questions. Some persons say that even though Krishna created such wonderful pastimes for us to meditate upon and sing about, still, we can think of Him however we want. I once heard someone tell persons that they can think about Krishna in some form with His nose at the back of His head and that is fine. Such persons have the view that any form that they create to meditate upon is equal to that of Krishna. How should we understand such views?
I am thinking that such views are definitely not devotional, since Krishna comes to manifest His pastimes for His devotees pleasure. What devotee would even care to think of Krishna in any other way than as He is? Such views are definitely impersonal in nature, I think.
Now a days, there are plenty of so called "bhakti" cults that present a surface like pretense of bhakti, but deep down, they are anything but devotional. How are we to recognize pure devotion? And, are such impersonal approaches to bhakti actually demonic in nature? What I mean by this is that the demonic qualities are that of wanting to Lord it over things. But, if someone is meditating upon Krishna according to their own whims, is that not still an attempt to Lord it over...?
Such a mentality goes against the submissive attitude of a devotee who meditates on the form of Krishna, as He is, and not a form concocted in one's mind. Please enlighten me.
Yes, there are many concoctions that go on in the name of religion. Some say people can imagine anything they want and that is as good as the real thing, if there is one. The form of Krishna is not an imagined one concocted in the fertile brain of the mundaners. You are right - such imaginations are all impersonal. Since the impersonalists think that all forms, names, qualities and activities are limiting and mundane, they cannot understand the transcendental nature of Krsna. As we can easily see such conclusion of the impersonalist is also mundane because they project their mundane experience on the transcendent Lord.
Krsna says that the foolish (mudha) cannot understand Him and take Him to be an ordinary human when He appears (9th chapter of BG). Now Brahma after hearing the amazing pastimes of Krsna, wondered how an ordinary cowherd boy can perform such feats. To test that, Brahma stole the cowherd boys and cows and calves, and we know how he was humbled. He started offering prayers and let us see what he says (SB 10th canto 14th chapter). Correction: The following is from prayers by demigods to Krsna who was in Devaki's womb (SB 10th canto 2nd chapter).
If KRSNa’s transcendental body was not beyond the modes of material nature, one could not understand the difference between matter and transcendence. Unless one is influenced by the presence of KRSNa’s form, it is not possible to understand His transcendental nature. Those who are in the modes of material nature cannot understand the Lord, who can be understood only by His mercy. Since time immemorial, people have worshiped the transcendental forms of the Lord. Devotees who awaken their transcendental nature in the presence of the Lord and who follow the rules and regulations of bhakti can understand the Lord, who comes from the spiritual world for the benefit of people. If one does not take to this process, one imagines some form of God according to material qualities and thus can never awaken a real understanding of the Lord. Deity worship, even in the personal absence of the Lord, awakens the transcendental nature of the devotee, who thus becomes attached to the Lord.
Srila Prabhupada beautifully explains that the appearance of KRSNa is the answer to all imaginary iconography of the Supreme Lord. Everyone imagines the form of the Lord according to his mode of nature. When someone hears He is the oldest, he thinks the Lord is an old man. But though oldest, KRSNa is still freshly youthful. People think the Lord has sometimes no form and sometimes He has form. But the presentation of KRSNa in the Brahma-samhitA is scientific, experienced knowledge given by BrahmA. The demigods prayed that without the appearance of KRSNa, neither ajnAna-bhidA (the nescience by speculative knowledge) nor vijnAnam would be realized. By KRSNa’s appearance, all kinds of imaginations and speculations (ajnAna-bhidA) end, and the real, experienced knowledge of authorities like Lord BrahmA will be established.
The impersonalist thinks the Lord’s form is made of mundane goodness. But Sankara accepts the form of NArAyaNa to be transcendental to material nature. The Lord takes on different names and forms according to different situations. Impersonalists think that the Lord’s many forms and names are according to a particular type of work and quality because they accept Him from the position of a material observer. One can understand KRSNa only by devotional service and not by mental speculation because He is covered by a curtain of YogamAyA.
The transcendental name and form of the Lord are not ascertained by those who merely speculate on the path of imagination. His name, form and attributes can be ascertained only thru devotional service. The impersonalists cannot understand that the name of the Lord is identical with His form. In the material world there is a difference between form and name. By chanting Hare KRSNa, one can realize that he is always in the company of the Lord. For persons not advanced in absolute knowledge, KRSNa exhibits His transcendental pastimes so that they can think about them and get benefited.
As always, your answers are wonderful. I am seeing how easy it is to be lead astray by various philosophies. Impersonalism is really quite rampant everywhere. Fighting such impersonalism and propagating the message of full surrender unto the lotus feet of Krishna must be frought with difficulties. Who can imagine the trials of being a preacher? Therefore, I would like to take a moment and offer my respects unto all the preachers of ISKCON who are strictly following their spiritual masters orders and putting forward Lord Caitanya's movement. Jai!
One perspective is - is that it is really a personal relationship with you and god, and this is all that matters in that respect.
The Supreme Being has no form as we know, and takes form at will as a matter of his own business.
The renderings of the forms that we know are created by inspired sculptors and artist, for the purpose of helping others visualize, to help solidify the transcendental message.
It is possible for one to worship with no forms- This is advanced!
One way to see it is - the forms that we know have a predominance of Dravidian features, because this is the geographical area where this religion developed. So there is an element of perspective on the part of the individual.
I have seen Shamanic rituals wherein they construct a temporary deity out of a pile of rocks, and make offerings to it. Then the next time they make the pile it looks different - ?
So its the transcendental 'formless' message that counts.
In reading the BG Introduction - 4 below, I had the following question come to mind.
How can we learn to be submissive to instruction? Now a days, science tells us so many things. Many persons find that the information coming from science and the Vedas seem to conflict. Recently, I read about the controversial aspects of the extinction of the dinosaurs. Srila Prabhupada said that no species is extinct. Yet, the scientists look around them and say "Where are these dinosaurs? They are extinct."
Hare Krishna,
Dear Lilia we have to accept the fact that these scientists are mere imperfect human beings who can't state a law perfect at once. As Prabhupada once said if the the so-called science of this world is perfect then why after a decade or few months the laws need to change? Theories proved 100% right today changes a decade later by some scientist proving it false. This is a carousel of fools who try to prove themselves God and knower of the Science. What scientists claim is nothing new. Srila Prabhupada had a broader vision of this universe unlike the scientist's limited world view, so perhaps He meant may be some other planet has those species or perhaps in spiritual world or have you ever thought these dinosaurs might have reduced in size? You should be aware of the fact that human beings have drastically reduced in size since the very beginning of this world, perhaps at the time of Krishna's personal presence 5000years ago our size would be 100 times of today's size (i'm not sure about the multiplication factor). So have faith. Hari Bol.
Thank you very much for such a wonderful response.
Well, according to the following dialogue, Srila Prabhupada said that these animals are not existing on other planets, that they are existing here. I thought of this idea at first myself. I thought that maybe the different species are eternally existing on different planets at different times in different environments, etc. But, Srila Prabhupada says "No" to this.
Slideshow Discussion, Washington D.C., July 3, 1976
760703SS.WDC
Svarupa Damodara: Do we know that in detail, Srila Prabhupada? What type of species are extinct? Not all the species extinct. As it is during Brahma's day, that partial annihilation, devastation, now some species are extinct?
Prabhupada: No species extinct. What you are reading? This is garbage.(?)
Svarupa Damodara: The physical forms.
Prabhupada: No, nothing is extinct. Everything is going on.
Svarupa Damodara: At that point, they are going to come up with the point that "How about dinosaurs?" They are going to ask like that.
Prabhupada: That is imagination, where is dinosaur finding.
Svarupa Damodara: They say they have all the bones.
Prabhupada: No, they are describing maybe another animal. That is existing. That is Timingila, they can swallow up big, big whale fishes. That big, bones, they are living still. Nothing is extinct. They are already there.
Rupanuga: Did these dinosaurs exist, or is it just their imagination?
Prabhupada: The big animal exists. I call it dinosaur or finosaur, that is your choice. Big animals existing. Timingila, I said the name, Timingila, still exist.
Rupanuga: Still exist.
Prabhupada: Oh, yes. They are always existing. Water elephants. There are elephants in water. Everything.
Rupanuga: So there is no such thing as extinction.
Prabhupada: No extinction, there is no question of extinction.
Rupanuga: If these animals were on this planet some millions of years ago, they are still here, is that correct?
Prabhupada: Yes. What do you know what are there within the water? You can take information from the sastras. It is not possible for you to see and go into the water, how big, big animals are there.
Hari-sauri: But it's possible that an animal may disappear from one planet, but still be on another planet, though, like that.
Prabhupada: No.
Hari-sauri: Because they claim that even within recorded history...
Prabhupada: They claim everything. That is... There is no question. Svarupa Damodara: (indistinct) fossil, they are called fossil record. Prabhupada: That is another thing. You can get a dead animal's body, but what is that?
Svarupa Damodara: They claim that many species are extinct.
Prabhupada: How they are extinct?
Hari-sauri: Well, like, they say that within modern history,
Prabhupada: First thing is they are all imperfect speculators. So what is the value of their sport? We don't take any value of it.
Rupanuga: They don't know where these animals are, that's all.
Prabhupada: They, simply like child, they are speculating. If he's
imperfect, then what is the value of his speculation? There is no value.
Svarupa Damodara: But then what happens at the time of partial devastation? At the end of Manu, the partial devastation, what happens to the species?
Prabhupada: Happens means these different ways become destroyed, but again, during creation, they come in.
I know that now a days, scientists are tracking animals, and there are such things as the national extinction list, etc. The dodo bird apparently became extinct. So many animals are coming up as extinct. Naturally, I can see how the scientists could possibly be mistaken and that there might still be dodo's out there somewhere.
Shrunk in size? I didn't consider that idea.
You are right. We should have faith. But, how do we develop such faith? Srila Prabhupada didn't bother to waste his time in contending these trivial matters. Instead, he focused on trying to get people to see in what ways their knowledge was limited due to the four defects of conditioned life 1) imperfect senses, 2) committing mistakes, 3) being in illusion, the 4) cheating propensity.
Scientists will go on debating as will the mental speculators, it is true. For one who is a mental speculator, there is no end to such speculative theories. Trying to fight each individual theory of theirs is a useless waste of time. Instead, we should attempt to illustrate to them how it is that they are suffering under the miseries of birth, death, old age, and disease and bring their attention to the real problem.
We shouldn't let such speculators detract us from finding the solutions to the real problems of our existence. Digging up bones is simply a useless waste of the human energy. Of course, the scientists will say that digging up bones is very important for us to understand the history of our planet and the evolution of the human species. But, this claim is based upon the false presumption that through this process, they can gain knowledge. They do not understand the meaning of being conditioned. That is why Srila Prabhupada kindly continued to try to focus attention on the real problems of existence. How else can they wake up and realize their position?
Humility is a product of knowledge, not the other way around. And the knowledge that comes from understanding one's nature as being conditioned, ensures humility, which ensures a submissive nature. So, how can we learn to be submissive? We must continue to hear again and again about the miseries of birth, death, old age, and disease. For the more we hear, this ensures that we gain knowledge of our position as being conditioned. Then, with such knowledge of our position, humility is awakened within us and then we are able to be submissive before the spiritual masters. Oh, all glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Thank you so much for responding to this post for this has absolutely enlivened me and allowed me to think about things much more clearly, especially in the way that Srila Prabhupada presents himself and the Vedic view. It is absolutely beautiful! So beautiful!
Haribol Lilia. You have explained all these things nicely. When we want to learn something we should have some faith on those who we approach to get knowledge from. That entails humility. If we simply have a challenging attitude, it means we are not serious about gaining knowledge. So the answer to your original question as to how to be submissive to instruction is to understand the need for gaining spiritual knowledge is crucial.
Lord Caitanya has instructed us only by being humble can we chant the holy name constantly. But of course, we cannot be artificial about humility. We associate with devotees, serve them and gain knowledge from them. That knowledge, as you say, will teach us humility. We come to know how merciful the devotees and Krsna are and seeing their greatness, we will naturally be humble. So we start with some faith and humility to gain knowledge but to really be sustained in that position, we need to act on that knowledge - pariprasnena sevaya - inquire and serve, and that would teach us humility.
About science and dinosaurs, others have already commented nicely on that.
Actually Vedic sciences are very much aligned with the more advanced modern discovery of multi dimensional theories like quantum mechanics. But science still has a long way to go to catch up to the Vedic understanding of the functions of the universe, but probably never.
I think Srila Prabhupada was giving instruction to these devotees by offering counterpoint to their 'body centric' line of questioning. Probably to see if they would get it or not, and if not, that they would think about it more, remembering what he stated.
The supreme God can make manifest any body form, at any time at will, he is the divine impetus, its just a little tweak of a strand of DNA, no body form is ever extinct !
Can you please relate more on this? I am interested to know how it is that Vedic science is in alignment with quantum mechanics. When you are talking about multi-dimensional theories, I am assuming that you are referring to string theory here. I do not have a very good understanding of Vedic science, so I am eager to learn.
Srila Prabhupada called his BG as BG As it is. He said everyone else gave interpretations according to their own philosophy, but only he gave the meaning as intended by Krsna. There are others who contested this claim and one even wrote a book called BG As it was. SP said that he is presenting the will of Krsna but when someone criticized his BG as always talking about Krsna, he smiled and agreed that the person has really understood his (SP's) motivations.
Sankara wrote his own commentary on the gita, and certainly no one would claim that it was not a bona fide one - meaning not going against the grain of scripture. So how can we really justify SP calling his edition As it is?
I would say the effect it had/has/will have on those who read it with some sincerity. It brings about a transformation in the mind of the reader and how they become inquisitive to know more about Krishna.
Any thoughts, Lilia? (since you are the only one who will ever read this and comment).
Well, since only persons that are engaged in personal relationships with Krishna can actually understand Krishna, since the person Krishna is the Absolute final word in the Absolute Truth, then it follows that unless one is a devotee of Krishna, and has actually realized the Absolute Truth, then one can not give commentaries on the Bhagavad-Gita. What are the qualifications to realize the Absolute Truth?
Well, the Absolute Truth can not be perceived with the material senses. This means, that the person who has realized the Absolute Truth has transcended the limitations of being a conditioned soul. As conditioned souls we maintain the four defects 1) imperfect senses, 2) being in illusion, 3) making mistakes, and 4) a cheating propensity.
No one can realize the Absolute Truth with his material senses. Only when one's senses are completely saturated by devotional service does Krishna actually reveal Himself. So, therefore, naturally, only a devotee of Krishna will actually know Him. And, how can we recognize a devotee who has realized the Absolute Truth. Well, in BG, Krishna says "Whoever knows Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, without doubting, is the knower of everything. He therefore engages himself in full devotional service to Me, O son of Bharata." (BG 15.19)
So, that person who kows the Absolute Truth, Krishna, will be fully engaged in devotional service. This means that he will engage all of his words, deeds, all of his senses, his body, mind, everything in the service of Krishna. If someone is not doing this, then we can understand that their commentary is bogus and they have not realized the Absolute Truth, Krishna. Therefore, they can not tell us about Krishna, since they have no relationship with Krishna.
Srila Prabhupada, recognized that those persons who were writing commentaries on the BG were not engaged in devotional service to Krishna, so therefore, what knowledge could they give of Krishna? It wasn't that this was Srila Prabhupada's personal opinion on the subject, rather it's a matter of what Krishna says. Krishna says that those persons who know Him engage in full devotional service to Him. So, the fact that these commentaries were written up by persons not engaged in Krishna's full devotional service directly proves that they are bogus.
So, Srila Prabhupada did the most valuable service by writing Bhagavad-Gita As it Is, which is in direct line with the teachings of Krishna. In the case of Sankara, he realized that Krishna was the Absolute Truth, offering his prayers to Krishna, so Sankara was totally authorized to write his commentary on the BG. But, part of Sankara's service was to preach impersonalism, since he was so ordered to do so. But, at no time did Sankara not recognize the authority of Krishna. In fact, Sankara said
bhaja govindam bhaja govindam
bhaja govindam mudha-mate
samprapte sannihite kale
na hi na hi raksati dukrn-karane
"You intellectual fools, just worship Govinda, just worship Govinda, just worship Govinda. Your grammatical knowledge and word jugglery will not save you at the time of death."
Haribol Lilia. You have raised an important question as always. The idea is one should be attached to Krsna in someway or the other. Krsna taught this knowledge in ancient times to Vivasvan, and more recently to Arjuna. Srila Prabhupada emphasizes many a time that one can understand the will of Krsna only by being part of a bona fide disciplic succession. The Padma Purana confirms unless one receives the mantra in a bona fide sampradaya, it will not have an effect.
Now who can transmit this knowledge properly? Krsna says He taught this to Arjuna because Arjuna is His friend and devotee. So one who is a friend and devotee of the Lord can understand Him. And that is what the acaryas like Ramanuja, Madhva, Visnusvami, Nimbaraka and many others are. Krsna comes to disseminate knowledge about Himself. And Prabhupada's BG does exactly that and thus one be sure it is Bhagavad gita as it is.
One can surely read SP's BGAII and be benefited because hearing from a pure devotee is beneficial. But as Karnamrta Prabhu in a recent blog pointed out, one should search out for a guru, surrender unto him and inquire from him submissively so that one can be enlightened with knowledge and realization. It is not at all esoteric. Krsna advises the same in BG, and we can search for a guru and surrender to him. Till such time, one can go on reading SP's BG and when ready put into practice what SP is saying: surrender to a guru. Otherwise what is the point in reading his books. They are not novels to simply read and throw away. Even that is beneficial, because any contact with a pure devotee is never a waste. But to realize the import of Bhagavad gita as it is, one should follow what SP teaches. Thats why there is a spiritual disciple required by the practitioners.
This is a most wonderful reply! You leave no room for any sort of ambiguity or fanciful imaginings as to what it is we are to do. This is most appreciated. Direct, clear answers are always so difficult to come by. Many people give so many different interpretations to things, but one knows they are in the hands of a devotee when the devotee speaks clearly and simply so that everyone can understand. This is indeed a quality of devotees and it is very much appreciated by all the worlds.
I am now quite certain that if I desire to gain transcendental knowledge, I must submit myself for instruction unto the lotus feet of a bona fide spiritual master in the line of disciplic succession. I know that there is no possibility of me gaining knowledge apart from His Divine Grace. And I know that His Divine Grace will be recognized as having the qualities similar to Arjuna, in that he will be a friend and devotee of Krishna.
The valuable information that you provided to me in this section that the universal form is actually brahma's body is really fantastic. I actually contacted HG Gopiparanadhana Prabhu (as you said that you heard this in his lecture) via email and He said that this is mentioned by Srila Jiva Gosvami in text 5 of his Bhagavat-sandarbha.
Following is his entire reply
H.G.Gopiparanadhana Prabhu replies:
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
The universal form (Virat) contains the prototypes of everything that
Brahma produces in the material universe. It is a material body, and Brahma identifies with it as his own body. So it is not that the Virat *is* Brahma, but that it is possessed by Brahma as his first material body. And like every living material body, the Supersoul is also present inside it
alongside the jiva. In this case Garbhodaka-sayi Visnu is present, since He is the Supersoul of the whole universe.
This is explained by Srila Jiva Gosvami in text 5 of his
Bhagavat-sandarbha.
Not by merely abstaining from work can one achieve freedom from
reaction, nor by renunciation alone can one attain perfection.
In the purport Srila Prabhupada said,
The renounced order of life can be accepted upon being purified by the
discharge of the prescribed form of duties which are laid down just to
purify the hearts of materialistic men. Without purification, one
cannot attain success by abruptly adopting the fourth order of life
(sannyasa).
1- Here in the purport it has been said that we cannot become a sannyasi till we dont follow the prescribe duties of the vedas to purify the heart. Can some one please tell me what are these prescribed duties ?
2- In Iskcon, devotees take sannyas from very young ages like 14 & 15. Then why are they permitted to do so as I am sure they might have not followed the prescribed duties recommended in the vedas.
Haribol, the prescribed duties refer to varnashrama dharma. Properly discharging ones duties as a brahmcari, grihasta, and vanaprastha. Then one can take sannyasa.
You will not find any 15 year old sannyasis in ISKCON, rather there are very strict requirements for one to take to the sannyasa ashrama. Out of emergency due to his near coming departure Srila Prabhupada had to start the sannyasa ashrama with his present disciples before he left his body. Therefore we find that there were sannyasis during Srila Prabhupada time taking to sannyasa at age 20-30. If Srila Prabhupada had not started the sannyasa training it would not be possible to introduce it in the future. Therefore because of the emergency of his near coming departure from this world Srila Prabhupada decided to introduce the sannyasa ashram.
I was in a misunderstanding till now about sannyasis. I thought that the brahmacaris who live in Iskcon are called sannyasis. Recently after having a talk with a devotee regarding the same I realized that I completely misunderstood the concept. Now I very well know the difference between a brahmacari and a sannyasi. :)
However I would like to ask you one more question. You mentioned about varnashrama dharma. I read this term quite a lot of times in the Gita also but am still not being able to understand it. Can you please tell me that if I chant 16 then have I followed all the prescribed duties of varnashrama dharma. ?Some where later on in chapter 3 Srila Prabhupada has said that a person in Krishna Consciousness does not even need to follow the precribed duties, thus I am a bit confused on this. Thanking you in advance. :)
Varnashrama Dharma or Daivi Varnashrama Dharma is a social system of dividing the education of society in to 4 varnas and 4 ashramas with the view of pleasing Krishna. It is an agricultural based system and it was what Srila Prabhupada was trying to establish in his later years. If one is educated according to his specific psychophysical nature then one can not only work more peacefully but one can also find time and peace of mind to engage in Krishna Consciousness.
If one wants to work towards a varnashrama society one must find some way to promote or actively participate in cow protection. Also one must also try to become a qualified brahmana for that is lacking in todays society. Generally one trains brahmanas from those who are inclined, but bhagavatam states in a state of emergency when a total lack is the then one must try to train brahmanas from all sections of society. Hare Krishna
Your humble servant
Nityananda Chandra Das
Hare Krishna Dear Prabhu, your reply is simply fantastic and I am not left with any doubts now. Till now whenever I read the term Varnashrama Dharma, I thought its meaning to be something very different than its actually meaning. I am really very grateful to you for your sincere guidance. :)
I have a question from the purport of Bhagavat-Gita. Some where between chapter 7-12 it has been stated twice that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has recommended reading of Srimad Bhagavatam almost 24 hrs so that one can get purified. However He has also recommended to chant almost 24 hrs as it is the only method in Kaliyug to get liberation. Now this has completely confused me. Which instruction of Lord Chaitanya should we follow, should we chant 24 hrs or read the Srimad Bhagavatam 24 hrs?
Haribol Mihir. I am unable to find what you are saying about Bhagavatam. Can you please find the exact purport and let me know.
I would understand what that means as one should always be engaged in the service of the Lord. Hearing Bhagavatam, chanting the holy names, worshipping the deity, associating with devotees and living in a holy place are the five potent forms of bhakti, says Rupa Gosvami. So one should constantly be engaged in these. Prabhupada said one hour reading in the morning and one hour in the evening. Rest of the day, apart from chanting and other essential temple services, he wanted the devotees to be actively engaged in book distribution or other services.
Recently in one blog, Karnamrta Prabhu wrote that one disciple wanted to chant always, and Prabhupada asked him to try. But the disciple could not keep it up. Prabhupada did not want us to imitate the exalted devotees but be engaged in service according to our capacities.
When one becomes advanced, his chanting becomes non different from Bhagavatam as chanting produces all the name, fame, pastimes, paraphernalia in the mind of the devotee without extraneous effort. In that stage one can be 24 hours engaged simultaneously in chanting and relishing Bhagavatam.
Hare Krishna Prabhuji. Thank you for the wonderful answer. The concerned information is available in edition 2 of Bhagavad-Gita, it is not in edition 1. The book available on www.krishna.com is edition 1, I dont know on which site I can find edition 2. Finding it from the book I have at home will become very difficult as it is some where between chapter 7-12. I am very sure of the information because in the last 2 months I have read chapter 7-12 three times. I will still try to search where exactly it is in the book.
1-In chapter 9 Lord Krishna said He is personally aloof from the material creation as everything does not rest on Him personally but it rests on His energy. On which energy of Krishna is everything resting. Is it superior energy, inferior energy, the supersoul expansion or some other energy.
2-In chapter 9 Lord Krishna said everything is resting on His energy where as in chapter 11 He showed that everything is resting on His universal form. Actually everything is resting on His energy or His universal form ?
3-Arjuna requested Lord Krishna to see His four handed form. In the purport Srila Prabhupada said, Arjuna wanted to see the four handed Narayan form. Even the Vishnu form is four handed then how do we understand whether Arjuna wanted to see the four handed Narayana form or the Vishnu form.
4- Though Krishna is the original supreme, all His incarnations such as Vishnu are said to be non-different from Him. Thus they should have the same identity as Krishna. However in the Krishna book there is a story of Lord Maha Vishnu stealing the children which proves that Maha Vishnu is different from Lord Krishna and they both have different identities. Maha Vishnu confirms that He stole the children as He wanted to see Krishna. Srila Prabhupada explains that when Maha Vishnu came to steal the children He could have seen Krishna but Krishna dint give Maha Vishnu the permssion to see Him. This means that Maha Vishnu and Krishna both have different identities. Why has it been said that Lord Krishna is non-different from Vishnu.
5- During the birth of Lord Krishna why did Lord Narayana appear first and not Krishna in His personal form. Even Lord Krishna could have appeared in His personal two handed form to inform His parents that He the Supreme Lord had taken birth through them.
6- In chapter 7 Lord Krishna said devotees of demigods go to the planets of demigods. This means devotees of Lord Shiva must go to Kailash Parvat as He resides there. However Kailash Parvat is just a small mountain then how can those millions of devotees live there ?
7- It is said though Lord Shiva lives on Kailash Parvat, Sadashiva lives in the spiritual world. Does this mean that if a person remembers Sadashiva during death He goes to the spiritual world ?
I will try to answer some of the questions. These questions made me go back and read the relevant sections more carefully in BG. And these are just what I understood from reading. Also since I have the commentaries stored on PC, I can easily access them, read them and answer questions. So I am just a retriever of information not a realized soul who has vast knowledge, as some might think. For realized, practical devotional service, one should approach nice devotees like Karnamrta Prabhu, Nityananda Candra Prabhu and others.
1. Krsna says everything rests on Him: mat-sthani sarva bhutani - all beings are situated on Me. Srila Prabhupada says that the energy of the Lord is spread all over creation, and everything is resting on that energy. At the end of the purport to 9.4, he says: 'He is present everywhere by His personal representation'. This means Krsna is supporting everything by the Supersoul.
Baladeva Vidyabhusana says: 'And though I am within everything and maintain and regulate everything, all moving and non moving entities are simultaneously situated within Me. This means their existence is dependent on Me...What is said here is that thru my expansion as the Paramatma I enter within the universe, and control and support it'. So by Supersoul, Krsna supports everything, and when He says everything is resting on me it means that their existence is dependent on Him.
The material world is a product of material energy. So the living beings here are situated in the material energy controlled by maya and ultimately by Krsna.
2. The material ingredients come from Maha Vishnu. He breathes out the universes. The Lord is aloof from the creation and the universal form is a material conception by the less intelligent who cannot adjust to the fact that the Supreme Lord has no material form. So for them a form made of matter is created. But the Lord's form cannot be material. So whose form is this? It is the body of Brahma. Brahma has this body and also the body that comes out of the navel of Lord Vishnu. All bodies have antaryami - the Lord as the Supersoul within them. So who is the antrayami of this universal body? It is Garbhodakasayi Visnu, who is the Supersoul of the entire universe. (All this is from a lecture by HG Gopiparanadhana Prabhu, available at the Radha Gopinatha site).
Arjuna after hearing Krsna speak about His vibhutis (powers) by which He pervades the world in chapter 10, wanted to see that form of the Lord. Krsna said at the end of chapter 10 that He maintains the creation by a spark of His splendor. This is the form of purusha that Arjuna wanted to see. This purusha is the Vishnu seated as antaryami within the universal form.
So there is no contradiction when Krsna says everything is resting on his energy or the universal form. The universal form is also the energy of the Lord.
3. We understand what Arjuna wanted to see by reading the purport of Srila Prabhupada. He says Arjuna wanted to see the Narayana form. There is no difference between Vishnu or Narayana. Both are transcendental, though their functions may be different - Vishnu in charge of material creation and maintenance, and Narayana, is the Lord of Vaikuntha. The text itself says that Arjuna wanted to see the catur-bhuja: the four handed form. Both Visvanatha Cakravarti and Baladeva Vidyabhusana says Arjuna desired to see the form with which Krsna appeared before Vasudeva and Devaki.
4. Advaitam acyutam anadim ananta rupam: the Lord has ananta rupa - many forms but still He is advaitam - all forms are non different. We should not think that Krsna puts on the makeup of Vishnu for sometime and when He comes down, He puts on the makeup of Krsna removing the makeup of Vishnu. No all forms are eternal and are present simultaneously. All are non different because they are all transcendental to material nature and belong to the category called visnu-tattva. Still there are differences in the forms in that some forms exhibit less qualities than the others. Krsna is said to have 4 extra qualities not present in the majestic forms of Narayana or Visnu.
5. Devaki and Vasudeva worshipped the Lord in their previous lives. They were more attached to the majestic four handed form of the Lord. And so to assure them that he was the same Narayana that they worshipped, Krsna assumed the 4 handed form.
6. Kailash Parvat may be a small mountain from our understanding but the planet where Siva resides may be not. In Kuruksetra 640 million people fought. Try to fit that many people in Kuruksetra. We should not understand these things from our limited understanding. When we impose material aspects to spritual life, we will get confused: time in spiritual world, desire trees in Goloka etc.
7. Do people know the real form of Sadasiva to worship Him? The Sadasiva that they worship here is just another demigod to fulfill their material desires. The real Sadasiva is an expansion of Lord Vishnu according to Brahma Samhita(5.18 and 5.20).
Hare Krishna Radhikesh Prabhu. You are very humble and loving. I really respect what you have said about Nityananda Chandra Prabhu and Karnamrita Das Prabhu, even I am aware that they are very humble and loving souls thus I am quite fond of them. However please note, I dont see whether a devotee is very highly spiritually advanced to answer my questions. I just see the humbleness and love with which they voluntarily agree to answer my stupid questions. As far as my observation is concerned, all the devotees on this forum whether new or advanced are all very loving and fit to answer questions.
If you dont mind few queries have arose in my mind after reading your answers and I would greatly appreciate if you could answer them.
1-You said Krishna has four extra qualities compared to Lord Vishnu and Lord Narayana. What are those four extra qualities?
2-As you said Nityananda Chandra Prabhu and Karnamrita Prabhu are realized souls. Can you please explain the exact definition of realized souls. Is it just that they have realized knowledge and know their eternal relationship with Krishna or they can also see Krishna, the spiritual world and talk to Krishna personally?
3-While answering J's questions you said when people went to the moon they could not see anyone due to their gross senses. However in one of the purports of Bhagavad Gita(somewhere between chapter 7-10) Srila Prabhupada confirms that since people are sent to the moon due to their pious activities, no one has actually been to the moon from earth. People are just falsely claiming to have gone to the moon. Is it true that actually people have not been to the moon as Srila Prabhupada Himself says it?
4-The valuable information you gave me that the Universal Form is actually Lord Brahma is very shocking for me. If you dont mind can you please name the scripture where this is stated except for the lecture where you heard the same.
1. Rupa Gosvami lists the 4 extra qualities of Krsna as:
rupa madhurya - his beauty surpasses he beauty of the three worlds; lila madhurya - he is an ocean of wonderful pastimes; venu madhurya - his flute captures everyone; and he is surrounded by wonderful devotees, especially the gopis who associate with Him in conjugal love.
2. Realized souls: the definition you have given is for the perfected devotees. What I meant was they read, have knowledge and engage in practical devotional service. When they engage in devotional service Krsna gives them more realizations as to how to apply the philosophy practically.
3. The moon trip is a big controversy. Srila Prabhupada did not believe that these people really went there because as you said one needs lots of pious activities to go to a heavenly planet like the moon. We follow the scriptures that Srila Prabhupada perfectly understood and not the material scientists. Sadaputa Prabhu had written a book called Vedic Cosmography where he deals with some aspects of the moon. At times, Srila Prabhupada said even if they had gone to the moon, it is no big deal. So we really need not worry about this issue. And there are many non devotees who also do not believe the moon trips.
4. I dont know the scripture where universal form being Brahma's body is stated. Gopi Prabhu, who helped complete the Bhagavatam after Prabhupada's departure, and who wrote the Brhad Bhagavatamrta and writing more books now, says that in the lecture: Sukadeva's instructions on Bhagavatam. I think he says that the acaryas say that.
I was hoping someone could answer these questions for me.
This one I've asked on livehelp a couple of times but I'll ask here as well in case someone has a different answer: in Chapter 8 of BG the heavenly planets of demigods and higher beings are mentioned. What exactly makes them 'heavenly' or 'higher'? Is it just extended duration of life and better facilities for sense gratification? Or something else?
In Text 8.21 it is mentioned that Krishna's beauty 'excels that of thousands of Cupids'. What are Cupids? I always thought they were those things in Greek or Roman mythology that shoot arrows at people to make them fall in love. Are there Cupids in Hindu mythology as well?
In Texts 8.24 - 8.25 it is mentioned that souls can go to the moon planet if they die at a certain time/place. Prabhupada mentions that the beings living there may not be perceived by the gross senses. Even still, if humans actually have gone to the moon shouldn't they at least have found SOMEthing? From what I understand the moon is not very large anyway, nowhere near the size of the earth at least. How many entities could possibly live there? And if entities do live there, though, what are their activities? What does someone who resides on the moon do?
In 15.14 it is said that the Lord is the fire in the stomach that digests food. Is that meant literally or figuratively? If it's figuratively then it sounds like he is the fire in the stomach in the same way that, of all mountains, he is the Himalayas - the point being that he is the best of all or the driving force/cause. But if it is meant literally, I'm fairly sure even scientists are 100% on their explanations of how food is digested. 15.14 makes it sound like there is an unknown method of food digestion that know no-one knows about but is, in fact, Krishna. What exactly is meant?
Hare Krishna J. Those who are pious and have worshipped the demigods go up to the higher or heavenly planets: urdhvam gacchanti sattva-stha: Krsna says those in goodness attain the upper regions. Since they attained the result by being good, it naturally means they have more facilities to enjoy sense gratification. They have extended duration of life compared to the earthly region and better ways to enjoy. Also they accept the Lord as the Supreme Controller although their facilities for enjoyment becomes an obstacle for them to worship the Lord whole heartedly.
Cupid is the god of love that induce love in the material world. He is called kama-deva or mohana - one who enchants. Krsna is called madana-mohana: one who enchants even the enchanter, Cupid, and Radharani is called madana-mohana-mohini: the enchantress of the enchanter of Cupid. Cupid does shoot arrows with his bow. Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura writes in his commentary to 10th canto: With five elements of illusion, like the five arrows of Cupid, Krsna had entered thru the gopis’ eyes and ignited a blazing fire in their hearts. Also Krsna's left lotus foot has the marking of Cupid's unstrung bow.
The moon is considered one of the 'higher' planets and thus people who have done lots of pious activities go there. There they enjoy life by drinking soma-rasa: the taste of moon drink. I think its a drink that gives pleasure and health to the residents there. Since the residents are not recognized by gross senses, people who have supposedly gone there cannot see them or perceive them. Residents in moon simply enjoy life till their pious credits are over and then come back again to earth.
BG 15.14: The potency of vegetables, so essential for strength, health and the pleasures of our palate, is supplied by Krsna. But even eating causes misery without proper digestion. Becoming the fire of digestion called vaisvanara, Krsna alone is the cause of digesting foods such as rice and other enjoyable items. He takes shelter in the stomachs of the living beings, and being engaged with the prana and apana life airs, which enliven the stomach, Krsna brings about the digestion of the four types of food eaten by the living entities. That Visnu alone is the body of the digestive fire is also stated in Vedanta.
Baladeva Vidyabhusana says '..becoming the fire of the stomach, accepting that small body...I bring about the digestion..'. So there is a form of Krsna who becomes the fire of digestion. The scientists cannot perceive Krsna. They can see the effects of Krsna and explain how digestion takes place. But they cannot see the cause behind the effects. They can explain 'how' digestion takes place and not 'why' digestion takes place that way. That 'why' factor is Krsna.
While reading Bhagavad-Gita a few days back I came across something very interesting. In chapter 11 Arjuna asks Krishna to show His universal form. It should be noted, however, that Arjuna was not personally interested in seeing the universal form. He was already convinced that Krishna was the Supreme Personality of Godhead. However he knew, in future there would be many people who would claim themselves as Krishna. Thus he wanted all the people to understand that if anybody would claim that he is Krishna then he should be ready to show the universal form. He also wanted to prove it to the people that Krishna not only theoritically proved Himself to be the supreme, but he also practically proved it. A universal form is temporary as the material world is temporary. A devotee is not interested in the universal form, he is only interested in Krishna's personal form as he only wants to give love to Krishna according to his relationship with Him.
It is very important to keep the above in mind as I know so many people who are claiming themselves to be Krishna in India. In South India there is someone called Sathya Sai Baba, who says he is the origianal Krishna himself and he already has millions of devotees. There is also another male personality who says he is an incarnation of Radharani, claiming such, he dances with all the females saying this is rasa dance. Believe me even he managed to get a lot of followers.
Thus I found this very interesting while reading the Bhagavad-Gita.
BG Intro 9b
Hare Krishna.
"The followers of Sankara argue that Brahman is consciousness itself, with no awareness of self or other things. But this is disproved here. This awareness of self in both the Lord and the jiva is not the material ahankara (false ego) which arises from the mahat-tattva. That is a meaningless proposal, since the material ahankara disappears during dissolution of the universe. (so ‘kamayata shows that the Lord had an identity before manifestation of ahankara)."
Can you explain to me how it is that consciousness can be manifest "with no awareness of self or other things." I am not understanding this. To my thinking, consciousness, means self-awareness. How can consciousness not include self-awareness? It doesn't even make any sense to me. How can there be consciousness without self-awareness? What kind of consciousness is that? I am asking this because I am thinking that maybe I do not understand the proper use of the word "consciousness." Sometimes this happens where words are often used interchangeably such as heart/mind and a Westerner does not rightly understand clearly. I wish to make sure that I have the proper definition of consciousness.
Is this meant in terms of like a an animal or something that has consciousness but no self-awareness? I am not so sure that animals don't have self-awareness. Is this the Vedic understanding, that animals are not self-aware or trees, etc. Can you please set me straight on the definitions here.
Lilia
Consciousness
Srila Prabhupada based his BG on Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary for the most part, and he dedicated his BG to the acarya. What I had written above is taken from the acarya's commentary.
For the Advaitavadis, Brahman is mere consciousness and only Brahman exists. There is no other. So when there is none other, what is there to be aware of? If we say we are conscious of something, then that something should exist apart from us so that we can be aware of it. But since there is nothing else apart from Brahman, there is no awareness. They rule out self awareness too, of Brahman being aware of itself. Thats why it is said their conception of Brahman is as good as dead matter, which is not aware of anything or itself.
Radhikesh das
That helps
me a lot to understand things much more clearly. I don't know where I would have ever been able to learn this otherwise. Thank you very much for your taking the time to clarify this for me. That is very kind of you.
Stop reading what is not of use
Hare Krishna,
Dear Lilia,
We humans try to test everything on touchstone of reasoning and trying to always see the both sides of the coin, but what to do when it's not a coin!! Still like fools we tend to assume it as a coin and reason it. Consciousness means to see everything happening as Krishna's leela, His wish, His mercy and to act with Krishna in accord to this leela (even if this leela goes against your will). As per my knowledge self-awareness is no where closer to Krishna Consciousness. Self-awareness means responding to your own physical and emotional needs (animals do have that but lesser than humans), where as being in Krishna’s consciousness is to be absorbed in Him and you get oblivious to your physical/emotional needs. All you care is about Krishna. Such a person is rarely witnessed.
Every living matter in this universe has consciousness, but it is limited according to the type of species. Humans have the most advanced type which surpasses self-awareness and can connect directly to Krishna. So consciousness in it’s entirety is to be absorbed in Krishna. It is like you’re an employee in some company and you see only the CEO doing everything, even the slightest effort made by a worker on physical grounds you see it as CEO’s wish. So Krishna is the CEO, the Supreme of this universe and you’re an employee, His servant. I hope this helps you a bit to understand what it means like to be Krishna Conscious. Stay away from dry philosophy as much as possible because we are not adept and can fall down anytime. In my life I've speculated enough over impersonal dry philosophy and through hard times learnt to worship Krishna as Supreme (He helps you in every way). I know confusion will always arise as you face this world or read something like this, but tell yourself to serve Krishna no matter what.
Hari Bol
Isn't it
important to understand the philosophy of Krishna Consciousness in terms of how the impersonalist philosophy fails to represent the truth? I think it is important because it helps us to fully understand the greatness of KC philosophy. Srila Prabhupada constantly talks about it in his purports to the BG and SB. He says how the impersonal philosophy fails to represent the full truth.
In my inquiry, I wanted to make sure that I rightly understood the meaning of consciousness and what was being said so as not to be lead into any confusion. I am finding that this is very important in order for clear understanding to be established. And, I feel quite satisfied by the response. This helps me to understand more the limited conception of impersonalism which in turn acts to purify my intelligence. As such, i am extremely grateful.
In talking to others about KC philosophy, one has to be knowledgeable of the impersonal understanding. I am not saying that one should study this philosophy. But, all I am saying, is that now a days, impersonalism is prevalent everywhere and it is important to understand exactly what it is that they think. If one doesn't know this, then how can one really fully understand the glories of KC philosophy?
Lilia
Srila Prabhupada
Hello Lilia,
Yes it is important to listen to all the words Srila Prabhupada says.
"He says how the impersonal philosophy fails to represent the full truth." -- short of the full story
vs.
"fails to represent the truth" - a lie
Im not trying to be critical, I see this a lot actually and just stopping here to make an example of how easy it is to get a different spin on something.
Haribol
Being Careful
Thank you for pointing this out to me. This is very much appreciated. This illustrates how important it is to chose one's words very carefully. Yes, there is a big difference between saying that the impersonal conception of God fails to represent the truth vs. that the impersonal conception of God fails to represent the full truth.
As we know, the Brahman conception or impersonal conception of God is a form of God-realization. This was my intended meaning, but I can see now how my words can be interpreted as being false.
I'll have to be more careful in the future.
Thanks,
Lilia
Avidya
This post made me stop and pause and contemplate some of the glories of Krishna Consciousness philosophy. And so I felt inspired to write this. I think it would be nice to start a forum topic completely centered around this subject. The subject matter is endless (being non-different from Krishna) and opens the doors for a lot of discussion.
I have taken this from the purport of SB 3.7.5 by Srila Prabhupada. One of the glories of Krishna Consciousness philosophy is that our condition in material existence is explained so nicely. It is not that we are God. If we were God, how is it that we have become illusioned by nescience? If so, then nescience is greater than God. The following makes this point beautifuly:
"The living entity is mentioned in Bhagavad-gītā (7.5) as parā prakṛti, and in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa he is mentioned as the parā śakti. He is part and parcel of the Supreme Lord as potency and not as the potent. The potent can exhibit many potencies, but the potency cannot equal the potent at any stage. One potency may be overcome by another potency, but to the potent, all potencies are under control. The jīva potency, or the kṣetrajña-śakti of the Lord, has the tendency to be overpowered by the external potency, avidyā-karma-saḿjñā, and in this way he is placed in the awkward circumstances of material existence. The living entity cannot be forgetful of his real identity unless influenced by the avidyā potency. Because the living entity is prone to the influence of the avidyā potency, he can never equal the supreme potent."
Haribol
well done
It is useful to have some underfstanding of other philosophical systems. The more I learn about other religions the more I appreciate devotional service to Krishna.
Having said that it can lead to a little confusion to consider conflicting philosophies can't it.
________________________________________
Visit the Food Channel @ Krishna.com
Knowledge and Nescience
The points made here are well taken. We should not read mayavada or any other useless philosophy that takes our attention from Krsna. At the same time as Lilia pointed out, we can glimpse thru them to have some basic understanding and how they think. If we go deep into them and try to understand their pros and cons, then it will lead to confusion, as Antony points out. Lord Caitanya had warned that listening to Mayavada will doom us.
It is safe for us to read what our acaryas say about them instead of reading some book by a Mayavadi or a regular scholar. Srila Prabhupada's Caitanya Caritamrta has lots of points refuting Mayavada. And his pranama mantra proclaims his mission - to deliver everyone from Mayavada and Sunyavada. So we can read how our acaryas made points against Mayavada so that it can weed out any traces of it within our minds, and also to get an understanding of the philosophy and thereby understand the true glories of Krishna consciousness.
Krsna says in BG 2.16 that the seers of truth have concluded there is no permanence for the body and no change for the soul. And how did they conclude this? After studying the natures of both - not just one sided. A similar point is made in Isopanisad mantra 11 - only one who learns the process of avidya (nescience) and that of knowledge (vidya) side by side can transcend the influence of repeated birth and death. So one who is inclined to read should have some basic understanding of what is not Krsna consciousness that would help them to weed out the useless things to keep our focus on Krsna.
And the Bhagavatam makes a beautiful point when the Nagapatnis pray to Krsna in 10.16.43 that the Lord sanctions the opposing views of different philosophies, and He is the power upholding expressed ideas and the words that express them. So with that mind when we read the refutation of Mayavada by our acaryas we can still maintain our focus on Krsna. Again let us not go to the extreme and say we can read whatever we want by whoever wrote it because it is Krsna who sanctioned the opposing views. Doing that will make us forget Krsna.
The context in which what I wrote appears when the five subjects of Bhagavad gita are being discussed. Of these five, only the jiva and isvara have consciousness. And then it is explained how the two are eternally individual - the soul always being aware of its constitutional position as servant of Krsna, and how Krsna is supremely conscious. This is then differentiated against how the Mayavadis view Brahman.
Radhikesh das
I absolutely
love this post. It is so perfect in the way that you integrate all of the points so beautifully with reference to scripture. Just reading that made me very happy; it is full of knowledge.
Lilia
Well, I don't know.
I don't read other philosophies. The only thing that I read is BG and SB. But, in reading them, sometimes I don't really understand what SP is saying in reference to Mayavadi philosophy, due to not having a solid understanding of what Mayavadi philosophy is, not that I want to become a scholar or anything. I know that Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to listen to Mayavadi philosophers speak their nonsense. So, I do not inquire or read anything from them; I simply am trying to direct my inquiries to Vaisnava's that are very much established in knowledge. That is why I ask questions for clarification so that I can understand.
good work
Listening and asking are very valuable tools once you know how to old them right.
________________________________________
Visit the Food Channel @ Krishna.com
: )
: )
Just have to smile.
This is nice Dru.
Love your focus on Krishna.
: )
Navasi
Intro BG - 5
Hare Krishna.
This is a comment in response to BG Introduction - 5 posted below.
The reasons behind the appearance of Krishna tend to be debated amongst certain circles. As far as what I know, in the BG, Krishna says Himself that He appears to lighten the world from the burden of irreligious persons. Yet, still, I have heard that this response is not conclusive. Some persons say that Krishna appeared to attract the conditioned souls by His pastimes. Others say Krishna appeared simply to protect His devotees.
I know the first explanation given by Krishna is definite, being that Krishna says so in the BG. But, how am I to make out these other explanations. Just why did Krishna appear? And what do the authorities say on this matter?
Lilia
Krsna's appearance
Krsna says in BG 4th chapter that 'yada yada hi dharmasya, glanir bhavati bharata' that He appears when there is dharmasya glani - religion or dharma gets distorted. And He next says He appears to protect the sadhus and destroy the wrong doers (duskrta). And He establishes dharma. This is what Krsna definitely states in BG.
Now if we try to understand this we should naturally think why should Krsna appear to lighten the world from the burden of the irreligious. He could comfortably do it from His abode - just turn on a switch to bring about floods, or fire or drought or spread a disease. And the saintly kings are the representatives of the Lord, and so they can see to the establishment of religious principles. Just like Pariksit chastised a cow killer. And when Krsna appeared in Dvapara yuga, there were still saintly kings like Yudhishtira, Pariksit and others. Of course there was Kamsa, Jarasandha and many many demons too. But religious principles were not as bad as they are today. Still Krsna appeared. Why?
The acaryas comment: Krsna appears because He performs feats which are very difficult for others to do. He appears in every age for delivering His dedicated devotees, whose hearts are bursting with longing and suffering due to their not seeing His form; for destroying the evil-minded persons like Ravana, Kamsa and Kesi, who give suffering to His devotees, and who cannot be killed by anyone except Him; and for establishing in a firm way, the supreme dharma of pure bhakti-yoga of meditating on Him, worshipping, serving Him and singing about Him, which cannot be instituted by anyone but Him. Lord Sri Krsna descends for the specific purpose of mitigating the anxieties of the pure devotees, who are very anxious to see Him in His original Vrndavana pastimes. Therefore, the prime purpose of the Krsna avatara is to satisfy His unalloyed devotees.
And yes, He appears to attract the conditioned souls by His pastimes. This is confirmed in BG in the verse that immediately follows the reasons of His appearance. In BG 4.9 He says those who understand the tattva or truth about His divine pastimes and appearance, will immediately go back to Him.
So all these are nicely revealed in the scriptures and mercifully explained by our acaryas.
Radhikesh das
Concoction
Hare Krishna.
This is a wonderful reply! Thanks a lot Radhikesh.
Still, I have some more questions. Some persons say that even though Krishna created such wonderful pastimes for us to meditate upon and sing about, still, we can think of Him however we want. I once heard someone tell persons that they can think about Krishna in some form with His nose at the back of His head and that is fine. Such persons have the view that any form that they create to meditate upon is equal to that of Krishna. How should we understand such views?
I am thinking that such views are definitely not devotional, since Krishna comes to manifest His pastimes for His devotees pleasure. What devotee would even care to think of Krishna in any other way than as He is? Such views are definitely impersonal in nature, I think.
Now a days, there are plenty of so called "bhakti" cults that present a surface like pretense of bhakti, but deep down, they are anything but devotional. How are we to recognize pure devotion? And, are such impersonal approaches to bhakti actually demonic in nature? What I mean by this is that the demonic qualities are that of wanting to Lord it over things. But, if someone is meditating upon Krishna according to their own whims, is that not still an attempt to Lord it over...?
Such a mentality goes against the submissive attitude of a devotee who meditates on the form of Krishna, as He is, and not a form concocted in one's mind. Please enlighten me.
Lilia
Realizations of pure devotees
Yes, there are many concoctions that go on in the name of religion. Some say people can imagine anything they want and that is as good as the real thing, if there is one. The form of Krishna is not an imagined one concocted in the fertile brain of the mundaners. You are right - such imaginations are all impersonal. Since the impersonalists think that all forms, names, qualities and activities are limiting and mundane, they cannot understand the transcendental nature of Krsna. As we can easily see such conclusion of the impersonalist is also mundane because they project their mundane experience on the transcendent Lord.
Krsna says that the foolish (mudha) cannot understand Him and take Him to be an ordinary human when He appears (9th chapter of BG). Now Brahma after hearing the amazing pastimes of Krsna, wondered how an ordinary cowherd boy can perform such feats. To test that, Brahma stole the cowherd boys and cows and calves, and we know how he was humbled. He started offering prayers and let us see what he says (SB 10th canto 14th chapter). Correction: The following is from prayers by demigods to Krsna who was in Devaki's womb (SB 10th canto 2nd chapter).
If KRSNa’s transcendental body was not beyond the modes of material nature, one could not understand the difference between matter and transcendence. Unless one is influenced by the presence of KRSNa’s form, it is not possible to understand His transcendental nature. Those who are in the modes of material nature cannot understand the Lord, who can be understood only by His mercy. Since time immemorial, people have worshiped the transcendental forms of the Lord. Devotees who awaken their transcendental nature in the presence of the Lord and who follow the rules and regulations of bhakti can understand the Lord, who comes from the spiritual world for the benefit of people. If one does not take to this process, one imagines some form of God according to material qualities and thus can never awaken a real understanding of the Lord. Deity worship, even in the personal absence of the Lord, awakens the transcendental nature of the devotee, who thus becomes attached to the Lord.
Srila Prabhupada beautifully explains that the appearance of KRSNa is the answer to all imaginary iconography of the Supreme Lord. Everyone imagines the form of the Lord according to his mode of nature. When someone hears He is the oldest, he thinks the Lord is an old man. But though oldest, KRSNa is still freshly youthful. People think the Lord has sometimes no form and sometimes He has form. But the presentation of KRSNa in the Brahma-samhitA is scientific, experienced knowledge given by BrahmA. The demigods prayed that without the appearance of KRSNa, neither ajnAna-bhidA (the nescience by speculative knowledge) nor vijnAnam would be realized. By KRSNa’s appearance, all kinds of imaginations and speculations (ajnAna-bhidA) end, and the real, experienced knowledge of authorities like Lord BrahmA will be established.
The impersonalist thinks the Lord’s form is made of mundane goodness. But Sankara accepts the form of NArAyaNa to be transcendental to material nature. The Lord takes on different names and forms according to different situations. Impersonalists think that the Lord’s many forms and names are according to a particular type of work and quality because they accept Him from the position of a material observer. One can understand KRSNa only by devotional service and not by mental speculation because He is covered by a curtain of YogamAyA.
The transcendental name and form of the Lord are not ascertained by those who merely speculate on the path of imagination. His name, form and attributes can be ascertained only thru devotional service. The impersonalists cannot understand that the name of the Lord is identical with His form. In the material world there is a difference between form and name. By chanting Hare KRSNa, one can realize that he is always in the company of the Lord. For persons not advanced in absolute knowledge, KRSNa exhibits His transcendental pastimes so that they can think about them and get benefited.
Radhikesh das
As always
Hare Krishna.
As always, your answers are wonderful. I am seeing how easy it is to be lead astray by various philosophies. Impersonalism is really quite rampant everywhere. Fighting such impersonalism and propagating the message of full surrender unto the lotus feet of Krishna must be frought with difficulties. Who can imagine the trials of being a preacher? Therefore, I would like to take a moment and offer my respects unto all the preachers of ISKCON who are strictly following their spiritual masters orders and putting forward Lord Caitanya's movement. Jai!
Lilia
formless form
One perspective is - is that it is really a personal relationship with you and god, and this is all that matters in that respect.
The Supreme Being has no form as we know, and takes form at will as a matter of his own business.
The renderings of the forms that we know are created by inspired sculptors and artist, for the purpose of helping others visualize, to help solidify the transcendental message.
It is possible for one to worship with no forms- This is advanced!
One way to see it is - the forms that we know have a predominance of Dravidian features, because this is the geographical area where this religion developed. So there is an element of perspective on the part of the individual.
I have seen Shamanic rituals wherein they construct a temporary deity out of a pile of rocks, and make offerings to it. Then the next time they make the pile it looks different - ?
So its the transcendental 'formless' message that counts.
Hari bol
BG Introduction 4
In reading the BG Introduction - 4 below, I had the following question come to mind.
How can we learn to be submissive to instruction? Now a days, science tells us so many things. Many persons find that the information coming from science and the Vedas seem to conflict. Recently, I read about the controversial aspects of the extinction of the dinosaurs. Srila Prabhupada said that no species is extinct. Yet, the scientists look around them and say "Where are these dinosaurs? They are extinct."
Lilia
Limited science
Hare Krishna,
Dear Lilia we have to accept the fact that these scientists are mere imperfect human beings who can't state a law perfect at once. As Prabhupada once said if the the so-called science of this world is perfect then why after a decade or few months the laws need to change? Theories proved 100% right today changes a decade later by some scientist proving it false. This is a carousel of fools who try to prove themselves God and knower of the Science. What scientists claim is nothing new. Srila Prabhupada had a broader vision of this universe unlike the scientist's limited world view, so perhaps He meant may be some other planet has those species or perhaps in spiritual world or have you ever thought these dinosaurs might have reduced in size? You should be aware of the fact that human beings have drastically reduced in size since the very beginning of this world, perhaps at the time of Krishna's personal presence 5000years ago our size would be 100 times of today's size (i'm not sure about the multiplication factor). So have faith. Hari Bol.
Submissive
Hare Krishna.
Thank you very much for such a wonderful response.
Well, according to the following dialogue, Srila Prabhupada said that these animals are not existing on other planets, that they are existing here. I thought of this idea at first myself. I thought that maybe the different species are eternally existing on different planets at different times in different environments, etc. But, Srila Prabhupada says "No" to this.
Slideshow Discussion, Washington D.C., July 3, 1976
760703SS.WDC
Svarupa Damodara: Do we know that in detail, Srila Prabhupada? What type of species are extinct? Not all the species extinct. As it is during Brahma's day, that partial annihilation, devastation, now some species are extinct?
Prabhupada: No species extinct. What you are reading? This is garbage.(?)
Svarupa Damodara: The physical forms.
Prabhupada: No, nothing is extinct. Everything is going on.
Svarupa Damodara: At that point, they are going to come up with the point that "How about dinosaurs?" They are going to ask like that.
Prabhupada: That is imagination, where is dinosaur finding.
Svarupa Damodara: They say they have all the bones.
Prabhupada: No, they are describing maybe another animal. That is existing. That is Timingila, they can swallow up big, big whale fishes. That big, bones, they are living still. Nothing is extinct. They are already there.
Rupanuga: Did these dinosaurs exist, or is it just their imagination?
Prabhupada: The big animal exists. I call it dinosaur or finosaur, that is your choice. Big animals existing. Timingila, I said the name, Timingila, still exist.
Rupanuga: Still exist.
Prabhupada: Oh, yes. They are always existing. Water elephants. There are elephants in water. Everything.
Rupanuga: So there is no such thing as extinction.
Prabhupada: No extinction, there is no question of extinction.
Rupanuga: If these animals were on this planet some millions of years ago, they are still here, is that correct?
Prabhupada: Yes. What do you know what are there within the water? You can take information from the sastras. It is not possible for you to see and go into the water, how big, big animals are there.
Hari-sauri: But it's possible that an animal may disappear from one planet, but still be on another planet, though, like that.
Prabhupada: No.
Hari-sauri: Because they claim that even within recorded history...
Prabhupada: They claim everything. That is... There is no question. Svarupa Damodara: (indistinct) fossil, they are called fossil record. Prabhupada: That is another thing. You can get a dead animal's body, but what is that?
Svarupa Damodara: They claim that many species are extinct.
Prabhupada: How they are extinct?
Hari-sauri: Well, like, they say that within modern history,
Prabhupada: First thing is they are all imperfect speculators. So what is the value of their sport? We don't take any value of it.
Rupanuga: They don't know where these animals are, that's all.
Prabhupada: They, simply like child, they are speculating. If he's
imperfect, then what is the value of his speculation? There is no value.
Svarupa Damodara: But then what happens at the time of partial devastation? At the end of Manu, the partial devastation, what happens to the species?
Prabhupada: Happens means these different ways become destroyed, but again, during creation, they come in.
I know that now a days, scientists are tracking animals, and there are such things as the national extinction list, etc. The dodo bird apparently became extinct. So many animals are coming up as extinct. Naturally, I can see how the scientists could possibly be mistaken and that there might still be dodo's out there somewhere.
Shrunk in size? I didn't consider that idea.
You are right. We should have faith. But, how do we develop such faith? Srila Prabhupada didn't bother to waste his time in contending these trivial matters. Instead, he focused on trying to get people to see in what ways their knowledge was limited due to the four defects of conditioned life 1) imperfect senses, 2) committing mistakes, 3) being in illusion, the 4) cheating propensity.
Scientists will go on debating as will the mental speculators, it is true. For one who is a mental speculator, there is no end to such speculative theories. Trying to fight each individual theory of theirs is a useless waste of time. Instead, we should attempt to illustrate to them how it is that they are suffering under the miseries of birth, death, old age, and disease and bring their attention to the real problem.
We shouldn't let such speculators detract us from finding the solutions to the real problems of our existence. Digging up bones is simply a useless waste of the human energy. Of course, the scientists will say that digging up bones is very important for us to understand the history of our planet and the evolution of the human species. But, this claim is based upon the false presumption that through this process, they can gain knowledge. They do not understand the meaning of being conditioned. That is why Srila Prabhupada kindly continued to try to focus attention on the real problems of existence. How else can they wake up and realize their position?
Humility is a product of knowledge, not the other way around. And the knowledge that comes from understanding one's nature as being conditioned, ensures humility, which ensures a submissive nature. So, how can we learn to be submissive? We must continue to hear again and again about the miseries of birth, death, old age, and disease. For the more we hear, this ensures that we gain knowledge of our position as being conditioned. Then, with such knowledge of our position, humility is awakened within us and then we are able to be submissive before the spiritual masters. Oh, all glories to Srila Prabhupada!
Thank you so much for responding to this post for this has absolutely enlivened me and allowed me to think about things much more clearly, especially in the way that Srila Prabhupada presents himself and the Vedic view. It is absolutely beautiful! So beautiful!
Wishing you well,
Lilia
Humility, submission and knowledge
Haribol Lilia. You have explained all these things nicely. When we want to learn something we should have some faith on those who we approach to get knowledge from. That entails humility. If we simply have a challenging attitude, it means we are not serious about gaining knowledge. So the answer to your original question as to how to be submissive to instruction is to understand the need for gaining spiritual knowledge is crucial.
Lord Caitanya has instructed us only by being humble can we chant the holy name constantly. But of course, we cannot be artificial about humility. We associate with devotees, serve them and gain knowledge from them. That knowledge, as you say, will teach us humility. We come to know how merciful the devotees and Krsna are and seeing their greatness, we will naturally be humble. So we start with some faith and humility to gain knowledge but to really be sustained in that position, we need to act on that knowledge - pariprasnena sevaya - inquire and serve, and that would teach us humility.
About science and dinosaurs, others have already commented nicely on that.
Radhikesh das
Vedic Science
Actually Vedic sciences are very much aligned with the more advanced modern discovery of multi dimensional theories like quantum mechanics. But science still has a long way to go to catch up to the Vedic understanding of the functions of the universe, but probably never.
I think Srila Prabhupada was giving instruction to these devotees by offering counterpoint to their 'body centric' line of questioning. Probably to see if they would get it or not, and if not, that they would think about it more, remembering what he stated.
The supreme God can make manifest any body form, at any time at will, he is the divine impetus, its just a little tweak of a strand of DNA, no body form is ever extinct !
Hare Krishna
Can you?
Hare Krishna.
Can you please relate more on this? I am interested to know how it is that Vedic science is in alignment with quantum mechanics. When you are talking about multi-dimensional theories, I am assuming that you are referring to string theory here. I do not have a very good understanding of Vedic science, so I am eager to learn.
Lilia
Sure
Where to start? -
It would be best for you to go to these sites and explore.
These two places seem to be favoring a Puranic friendly dissertation.
Although the science of sankaya and the fields of Vedic disciplines are more elaborated in the six Vedangas, the Aranyakas and the Upvedas.
http://www.vedic-academy.com/articles/science/cosmology.htm
http://www.binstitute.org/index.php?pr=Book_Store
Happy reading.
Hare Krishna
More on As it Is
Srila Prabhupada called his BG as BG As it is. He said everyone else gave interpretations according to their own philosophy, but only he gave the meaning as intended by Krsna. There are others who contested this claim and one even wrote a book called BG As it was. SP said that he is presenting the will of Krsna but when someone criticized his BG as always talking about Krsna, he smiled and agreed that the person has really understood his (SP's) motivations.
Sankara wrote his own commentary on the gita, and certainly no one would claim that it was not a bona fide one - meaning not going against the grain of scripture. So how can we really justify SP calling his edition As it is?
I would say the effect it had/has/will have on those who read it with some sincerity. It brings about a transformation in the mind of the reader and how they become inquisitive to know more about Krishna.
Any thoughts, Lilia? (since you are the only one who will ever read this and comment).
Radhikesh das
Thoughts
Hare Krishna.
Well, since only persons that are engaged in personal relationships with Krishna can actually understand Krishna, since the person Krishna is the Absolute final word in the Absolute Truth, then it follows that unless one is a devotee of Krishna, and has actually realized the Absolute Truth, then one can not give commentaries on the Bhagavad-Gita. What are the qualifications to realize the Absolute Truth?
Well, the Absolute Truth can not be perceived with the material senses. This means, that the person who has realized the Absolute Truth has transcended the limitations of being a conditioned soul. As conditioned souls we maintain the four defects 1) imperfect senses, 2) being in illusion, 3) making mistakes, and 4) a cheating propensity.
No one can realize the Absolute Truth with his material senses. Only when one's senses are completely saturated by devotional service does Krishna actually reveal Himself. So, therefore, naturally, only a devotee of Krishna will actually know Him. And, how can we recognize a devotee who has realized the Absolute Truth. Well, in BG, Krishna says "Whoever knows Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, without doubting, is the knower of everything. He therefore engages himself in full devotional service to Me, O son of Bharata." (BG 15.19)
So, that person who kows the Absolute Truth, Krishna, will be fully engaged in devotional service. This means that he will engage all of his words, deeds, all of his senses, his body, mind, everything in the service of Krishna. If someone is not doing this, then we can understand that their commentary is bogus and they have not realized the Absolute Truth, Krishna. Therefore, they can not tell us about Krishna, since they have no relationship with Krishna.
Srila Prabhupada, recognized that those persons who were writing commentaries on the BG were not engaged in devotional service to Krishna, so therefore, what knowledge could they give of Krishna? It wasn't that this was Srila Prabhupada's personal opinion on the subject, rather it's a matter of what Krishna says. Krishna says that those persons who know Him engage in full devotional service to Him. So, the fact that these commentaries were written up by persons not engaged in Krishna's full devotional service directly proves that they are bogus.
So, Srila Prabhupada did the most valuable service by writing Bhagavad-Gita As it Is, which is in direct line with the teachings of Krishna. In the case of Sankara, he realized that Krishna was the Absolute Truth, offering his prayers to Krishna, so Sankara was totally authorized to write his commentary on the BG. But, part of Sankara's service was to preach impersonalism, since he was so ordered to do so. But, at no time did Sankara not recognize the authority of Krishna. In fact, Sankara said
bhaja govindam bhaja govindam
bhaja govindam mudha-mate
samprapte sannihite kale
na hi na hi raksati dukrn-karane
"You intellectual fools, just worship Govinda, just worship Govinda, just worship Govinda. Your grammatical knowledge and word jugglery will not save you at the time of death."
Lilia
Parampara
Haribol Lilia. You have raised an important question as always. The idea is one should be attached to Krsna in someway or the other. Krsna taught this knowledge in ancient times to Vivasvan, and more recently to Arjuna. Srila Prabhupada emphasizes many a time that one can understand the will of Krsna only by being part of a bona fide disciplic succession. The Padma Purana confirms unless one receives the mantra in a bona fide sampradaya, it will not have an effect.
Now who can transmit this knowledge properly? Krsna says He taught this to Arjuna because Arjuna is His friend and devotee. So one who is a friend and devotee of the Lord can understand Him. And that is what the acaryas like Ramanuja, Madhva, Visnusvami, Nimbaraka and many others are. Krsna comes to disseminate knowledge about Himself. And Prabhupada's BG does exactly that and thus one be sure it is Bhagavad gita as it is.
One can surely read SP's BGAII and be benefited because hearing from a pure devotee is beneficial. But as Karnamrta Prabhu in a recent blog pointed out, one should search out for a guru, surrender unto him and inquire from him submissively so that one can be enlightened with knowledge and realization. It is not at all esoteric. Krsna advises the same in BG, and we can search for a guru and surrender to him. Till such time, one can go on reading SP's BG and when ready put into practice what SP is saying: surrender to a guru. Otherwise what is the point in reading his books. They are not novels to simply read and throw away. Even that is beneficial, because any contact with a pure devotee is never a waste. But to realize the import of Bhagavad gita as it is, one should follow what SP teaches. Thats why there is a spiritual disciple required by the practitioners.
Radhikesh das
Wonderful
Hare Krishna.
This is a most wonderful reply! You leave no room for any sort of ambiguity or fanciful imaginings as to what it is we are to do. This is most appreciated. Direct, clear answers are always so difficult to come by. Many people give so many different interpretations to things, but one knows they are in the hands of a devotee when the devotee speaks clearly and simply so that everyone can understand. This is indeed a quality of devotees and it is very much appreciated by all the worlds.
I am now quite certain that if I desire to gain transcendental knowledge, I must submit myself for instruction unto the lotus feet of a bona fide spiritual master in the line of disciplic succession. I know that there is no possibility of me gaining knowledge apart from His Divine Grace. And I know that His Divine Grace will be recognized as having the qualities similar to Arjuna, in that he will be a friend and devotee of Krishna.
Lilia
Dear Radhikesh Prabhu
Hare Krishna Dearest Prabhuji,
The valuable information that you provided to me in this section that the universal form is actually brahma's body is really fantastic. I actually contacted HG Gopiparanadhana Prabhu (as you said that you heard this in his lecture) via email and He said that this is mentioned by Srila Jiva Gosvami in text 5 of his Bhagavat-sandarbha.
Following is his entire reply
H.G.Gopiparanadhana Prabhu replies:
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
The universal form (Virat) contains the prototypes of everything that
Brahma produces in the material universe. It is a material body, and Brahma identifies with it as his own body. So it is not that the Virat *is* Brahma, but that it is possessed by Brahma as his first material body. And like every living material body, the Supersoul is also present inside it
alongside the jiva. In this case Garbhodaka-sayi Visnu is present, since He is the Supersoul of the whole universe.
This is explained by Srila Jiva Gosvami in text 5 of his
Bhagavat-sandarbha.
Sincerely,
Mihir.
Thanks
Thanks Mihir for getting clarification from Gopiparanadhana Prabhu and sharing it here.
Radhikesh das
Query from Chapter 3 of Bhagavad Gita
In chapter 3 text 4 it is said
Not by merely abstaining from work can one achieve freedom from
reaction, nor by renunciation alone can one attain perfection.
In the purport Srila Prabhupada said,
The renounced order of life can be accepted upon being purified by the
discharge of the prescribed form of duties which are laid down just to
purify the hearts of materialistic men. Without purification, one
cannot attain success by abruptly adopting the fourth order of life
(sannyasa).
1- Here in the purport it has been said that we cannot become a sannyasi till we dont follow the prescribe duties of the vedas to purify the heart. Can some one please tell me what are these prescribed duties ?
2- In Iskcon, devotees take sannyas from very young ages like 14 & 15. Then why are they permitted to do so as I am sure they might have not followed the prescribed duties recommended in the vedas.
Thanking in advance.
Love,
Mihir
15 year old sannyasi??
Haribol, the prescribed duties refer to varnashrama dharma. Properly discharging ones duties as a brahmcari, grihasta, and vanaprastha. Then one can take sannyasa.
You will not find any 15 year old sannyasis in ISKCON, rather there are very strict requirements for one to take to the sannyasa ashrama. Out of emergency due to his near coming departure Srila Prabhupada had to start the sannyasa ashrama with his present disciples before he left his body. Therefore we find that there were sannyasis during Srila Prabhupada time taking to sannyasa at age 20-30. If Srila Prabhupada had not started the sannyasa training it would not be possible to introduce it in the future. Therefore because of the emergency of his near coming departure from this world Srila Prabhupada decided to introduce the sannyasa ashram.
For more information about ISKCON sannyasa and its requirements please see the official ISKCON Sannyasa Ministry Website. http://www.iskcon.net.au/sannyasaministry/
Thank you for the information :)
Hare Krishna Prabhu.
I was in a misunderstanding till now about sannyasis. I thought that the brahmacaris who live in Iskcon are called sannyasis. Recently after having a talk with a devotee regarding the same I realized that I completely misunderstood the concept. Now I very well know the difference between a brahmacari and a sannyasi. :)
However I would like to ask you one more question. You mentioned about varnashrama dharma. I read this term quite a lot of times in the Gita also but am still not being able to understand it. Can you please tell me that if I chant 16 then have I followed all the prescribed duties of varnashrama dharma. ?Some where later on in chapter 3 Srila Prabhupada has said that a person in Krishna Consciousness does not even need to follow the precribed duties, thus I am a bit confused on this. Thanking you in advance. :)
Sincerely,
Mihir.
Varnashrama Dharma
Varnashrama Dharma or Daivi Varnashrama Dharma is a social system of dividing the education of society in to 4 varnas and 4 ashramas with the view of pleasing Krishna. It is an agricultural based system and it was what Srila Prabhupada was trying to establish in his later years. If one is educated according to his specific psychophysical nature then one can not only work more peacefully but one can also find time and peace of mind to engage in Krishna Consciousness.
If one wants to work towards a varnashrama society one must find some way to promote or actively participate in cow protection. Also one must also try to become a qualified brahmana for that is lacking in todays society. Generally one trains brahmanas from those who are inclined, but bhagavatam states in a state of emergency when a total lack is the then one must try to train brahmanas from all sections of society. Hare Krishna
Your humble servant
Nityananda Chandra Das
Thank you for such a fantastic reply :)
Hare Krishna Dear Prabhu, your reply is simply fantastic and I am not left with any doubts now. Till now whenever I read the term Varnashrama Dharma, I thought its meaning to be something very different than its actually meaning. I am really very grateful to you for your sincere guidance. :)
Love,
Mihir
Query from Purport of Bhagavad Gita
I have a question from the purport of Bhagavat-Gita. Some where between chapter 7-12 it has been stated twice that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has recommended reading of Srimad Bhagavatam almost 24 hrs so that one can get purified. However He has also recommended to chant almost 24 hrs as it is the only method in Kaliyug to get liberation. Now this has completely confused me. Which instruction of Lord Chaitanya should we follow, should we chant 24 hrs or read the Srimad Bhagavatam 24 hrs?
Sincerely,
Mihir
Always
Haribol Mihir. I am unable to find what you are saying about Bhagavatam. Can you please find the exact purport and let me know.
I would understand what that means as one should always be engaged in the service of the Lord. Hearing Bhagavatam, chanting the holy names, worshipping the deity, associating with devotees and living in a holy place are the five potent forms of bhakti, says Rupa Gosvami. So one should constantly be engaged in these. Prabhupada said one hour reading in the morning and one hour in the evening. Rest of the day, apart from chanting and other essential temple services, he wanted the devotees to be actively engaged in book distribution or other services.
Recently in one blog, Karnamrta Prabhu wrote that one disciple wanted to chant always, and Prabhupada asked him to try. But the disciple could not keep it up. Prabhupada did not want us to imitate the exalted devotees but be engaged in service according to our capacities.
When one becomes advanced, his chanting becomes non different from Bhagavatam as chanting produces all the name, fame, pastimes, paraphernalia in the mind of the devotee without extraneous effort. In that stage one can be 24 hours engaged simultaneously in chanting and relishing Bhagavatam.
Radhikesh das
In Edition 2
Hare Krishna Prabhuji. Thank you for the wonderful answer. The concerned information is available in edition 2 of Bhagavad-Gita, it is not in edition 1. The book available on www.krishna.com is edition 1, I dont know on which site I can find edition 2. Finding it from the book I have at home will become very difficult as it is some where between chapter 7-12. I am very sure of the information because in the last 2 months I have read chapter 7-12 three times. I will still try to search where exactly it is in the book.
Sincerely,
Mihir.
MULTIPLE QUESTIONS
1-In chapter 9 Lord Krishna said He is personally aloof from the material creation as everything does not rest on Him personally but it rests on His energy. On which energy of Krishna is everything resting. Is it superior energy, inferior energy, the supersoul expansion or some other energy.
2-In chapter 9 Lord Krishna said everything is resting on His energy where as in chapter 11 He showed that everything is resting on His universal form. Actually everything is resting on His energy or His universal form ?
3-Arjuna requested Lord Krishna to see His four handed form. In the purport Srila Prabhupada said, Arjuna wanted to see the four handed Narayan form. Even the Vishnu form is four handed then how do we understand whether Arjuna wanted to see the four handed Narayana form or the Vishnu form.
4- Though Krishna is the original supreme, all His incarnations such as Vishnu are said to be non-different from Him. Thus they should have the same identity as Krishna. However in the Krishna book there is a story of Lord Maha Vishnu stealing the children which proves that Maha Vishnu is different from Lord Krishna and they both have different identities. Maha Vishnu confirms that He stole the children as He wanted to see Krishna. Srila Prabhupada explains that when Maha Vishnu came to steal the children He could have seen Krishna but Krishna dint give Maha Vishnu the permssion to see Him. This means that Maha Vishnu and Krishna both have different identities. Why has it been said that Lord Krishna is non-different from Vishnu.
5- During the birth of Lord Krishna why did Lord Narayana appear first and not Krishna in His personal form. Even Lord Krishna could have appeared in His personal two handed form to inform His parents that He the Supreme Lord had taken birth through them.
6- In chapter 7 Lord Krishna said devotees of demigods go to the planets of demigods. This means devotees of Lord Shiva must go to Kailash Parvat as He resides there. However Kailash Parvat is just a small mountain then how can those millions of devotees live there ?
7- It is said though Lord Shiva lives on Kailash Parvat, Sadashiva lives in the spiritual world. Does this mean that if a person remembers Sadashiva during death He goes to the spiritual world ?
Some answers
I will try to answer some of the questions. These questions made me go back and read the relevant sections more carefully in BG. And these are just what I understood from reading. Also since I have the commentaries stored on PC, I can easily access them, read them and answer questions. So I am just a retriever of information not a realized soul who has vast knowledge, as some might think. For realized, practical devotional service, one should approach nice devotees like Karnamrta Prabhu, Nityananda Candra Prabhu and others.
1. Krsna says everything rests on Him: mat-sthani sarva bhutani - all beings are situated on Me. Srila Prabhupada says that the energy of the Lord is spread all over creation, and everything is resting on that energy. At the end of the purport to 9.4, he says: 'He is present everywhere by His personal representation'. This means Krsna is supporting everything by the Supersoul.
Baladeva Vidyabhusana says: 'And though I am within everything and maintain and regulate everything, all moving and non moving entities are simultaneously situated within Me. This means their existence is dependent on Me...What is said here is that thru my expansion as the Paramatma I enter within the universe, and control and support it'. So by Supersoul, Krsna supports everything, and when He says everything is resting on me it means that their existence is dependent on Him.
The material world is a product of material energy. So the living beings here are situated in the material energy controlled by maya and ultimately by Krsna.
2. The material ingredients come from Maha Vishnu. He breathes out the universes. The Lord is aloof from the creation and the universal form is a material conception by the less intelligent who cannot adjust to the fact that the Supreme Lord has no material form. So for them a form made of matter is created. But the Lord's form cannot be material. So whose form is this? It is the body of Brahma. Brahma has this body and also the body that comes out of the navel of Lord Vishnu. All bodies have antaryami - the Lord as the Supersoul within them. So who is the antrayami of this universal body? It is Garbhodakasayi Visnu, who is the Supersoul of the entire universe. (All this is from a lecture by HG Gopiparanadhana Prabhu, available at the Radha Gopinatha site).
Arjuna after hearing Krsna speak about His vibhutis (powers) by which He pervades the world in chapter 10, wanted to see that form of the Lord. Krsna said at the end of chapter 10 that He maintains the creation by a spark of His splendor. This is the form of purusha that Arjuna wanted to see. This purusha is the Vishnu seated as antaryami within the universal form.
So there is no contradiction when Krsna says everything is resting on his energy or the universal form. The universal form is also the energy of the Lord.
3. We understand what Arjuna wanted to see by reading the purport of Srila Prabhupada. He says Arjuna wanted to see the Narayana form. There is no difference between Vishnu or Narayana. Both are transcendental, though their functions may be different - Vishnu in charge of material creation and maintenance, and Narayana, is the Lord of Vaikuntha. The text itself says that Arjuna wanted to see the catur-bhuja: the four handed form. Both Visvanatha Cakravarti and Baladeva Vidyabhusana says Arjuna desired to see the form with which Krsna appeared before Vasudeva and Devaki.
4. Advaitam acyutam anadim ananta rupam: the Lord has ananta rupa - many forms but still He is advaitam - all forms are non different. We should not think that Krsna puts on the makeup of Vishnu for sometime and when He comes down, He puts on the makeup of Krsna removing the makeup of Vishnu. No all forms are eternal and are present simultaneously. All are non different because they are all transcendental to material nature and belong to the category called visnu-tattva. Still there are differences in the forms in that some forms exhibit less qualities than the others. Krsna is said to have 4 extra qualities not present in the majestic forms of Narayana or Visnu.
5. Devaki and Vasudeva worshipped the Lord in their previous lives. They were more attached to the majestic four handed form of the Lord. And so to assure them that he was the same Narayana that they worshipped, Krsna assumed the 4 handed form.
6. Kailash Parvat may be a small mountain from our understanding but the planet where Siva resides may be not. In Kuruksetra 640 million people fought. Try to fit that many people in Kuruksetra. We should not understand these things from our limited understanding. When we impose material aspects to spritual life, we will get confused: time in spiritual world, desire trees in Goloka etc.
7. Do people know the real form of Sadasiva to worship Him? The Sadasiva that they worship here is just another demigod to fulfill their material desires. The real Sadasiva is an expansion of Lord Vishnu according to Brahma Samhita(5.18 and 5.20).
Radhikesh das
Thank you for your wonderful answers!!
Hare Krishna Radhikesh Prabhu. You are very humble and loving. I really respect what you have said about Nityananda Chandra Prabhu and Karnamrita Das Prabhu, even I am aware that they are very humble and loving souls thus I am quite fond of them. However please note, I dont see whether a devotee is very highly spiritually advanced to answer my questions. I just see the humbleness and love with which they voluntarily agree to answer my stupid questions. As far as my observation is concerned, all the devotees on this forum whether new or advanced are all very loving and fit to answer questions.
If you dont mind few queries have arose in my mind after reading your answers and I would greatly appreciate if you could answer them.
1-You said Krishna has four extra qualities compared to Lord Vishnu and Lord Narayana. What are those four extra qualities?
2-As you said Nityananda Chandra Prabhu and Karnamrita Prabhu are realized souls. Can you please explain the exact definition of realized souls. Is it just that they have realized knowledge and know their eternal relationship with Krishna or they can also see Krishna, the spiritual world and talk to Krishna personally?
3-While answering J's questions you said when people went to the moon they could not see anyone due to their gross senses. However in one of the purports of Bhagavad Gita(somewhere between chapter 7-10) Srila Prabhupada confirms that since people are sent to the moon due to their pious activities, no one has actually been to the moon from earth. People are just falsely claiming to have gone to the moon. Is it true that actually people have not been to the moon as Srila Prabhupada Himself says it?
4-The valuable information you gave me that the Universal Form is actually Lord Brahma is very shocking for me. If you dont mind can you please name the scripture where this is stated except for the lecture where you heard the same.
Thanking you once again.
Love,
Mihir.
Some more answers
1. Rupa Gosvami lists the 4 extra qualities of Krsna as:
rupa madhurya - his beauty surpasses he beauty of the three worlds; lila madhurya - he is an ocean of wonderful pastimes; venu madhurya - his flute captures everyone; and he is surrounded by wonderful devotees, especially the gopis who associate with Him in conjugal love.
2. Realized souls: the definition you have given is for the perfected devotees. What I meant was they read, have knowledge and engage in practical devotional service. When they engage in devotional service Krsna gives them more realizations as to how to apply the philosophy practically.
3. The moon trip is a big controversy. Srila Prabhupada did not believe that these people really went there because as you said one needs lots of pious activities to go to a heavenly planet like the moon. We follow the scriptures that Srila Prabhupada perfectly understood and not the material scientists. Sadaputa Prabhu had written a book called Vedic Cosmography where he deals with some aspects of the moon. At times, Srila Prabhupada said even if they had gone to the moon, it is no big deal. So we really need not worry about this issue. And there are many non devotees who also do not believe the moon trips.
4. I dont know the scripture where universal form being Brahma's body is stated. Gopi Prabhu, who helped complete the Bhagavatam after Prabhupada's departure, and who wrote the Brhad Bhagavatamrta and writing more books now, says that in the lecture: Sukadeva's instructions on Bhagavatam. I think he says that the acaryas say that.
Radhikesh das
Thank you so much for you answers
Hare Krishna!!
Questions
I was hoping someone could answer these questions for me.
This one I've asked on livehelp a couple of times but I'll ask here as well in case someone has a different answer: in Chapter 8 of BG the heavenly planets of demigods and higher beings are mentioned. What exactly makes them 'heavenly' or 'higher'? Is it just extended duration of life and better facilities for sense gratification? Or something else?
In Text 8.21 it is mentioned that Krishna's beauty 'excels that of thousands of Cupids'. What are Cupids? I always thought they were those things in Greek or Roman mythology that shoot arrows at people to make them fall in love. Are there Cupids in Hindu mythology as well?
In Texts 8.24 - 8.25 it is mentioned that souls can go to the moon planet if they die at a certain time/place. Prabhupada mentions that the beings living there may not be perceived by the gross senses. Even still, if humans actually have gone to the moon shouldn't they at least have found SOMEthing? From what I understand the moon is not very large anyway, nowhere near the size of the earth at least. How many entities could possibly live there? And if entities do live there, though, what are their activities? What does someone who resides on the moon do?
In 15.14 it is said that the Lord is the fire in the stomach that digests food. Is that meant literally or figuratively? If it's figuratively then it sounds like he is the fire in the stomach in the same way that, of all mountains, he is the Himalayas - the point being that he is the best of all or the driving force/cause. But if it is meant literally, I'm fairly sure even scientists are 100% on their explanations of how food is digested. 15.14 makes it sound like there is an unknown method of food digestion that know no-one knows about but is, in fact, Krishna. What exactly is meant?
Thanks in advance for any answers/suggestions :)
Answers
Hare Krishna J. Those who are pious and have worshipped the demigods go up to the higher or heavenly planets: urdhvam gacchanti sattva-stha: Krsna says those in goodness attain the upper regions. Since they attained the result by being good, it naturally means they have more facilities to enjoy sense gratification. They have extended duration of life compared to the earthly region and better ways to enjoy. Also they accept the Lord as the Supreme Controller although their facilities for enjoyment becomes an obstacle for them to worship the Lord whole heartedly.
Cupid is the god of love that induce love in the material world. He is called kama-deva or mohana - one who enchants. Krsna is called madana-mohana: one who enchants even the enchanter, Cupid, and Radharani is called madana-mohana-mohini: the enchantress of the enchanter of Cupid. Cupid does shoot arrows with his bow. Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura writes in his commentary to 10th canto: With five elements of illusion, like the five arrows of Cupid, Krsna had entered thru the gopis’ eyes and ignited a blazing fire in their hearts. Also Krsna's left lotus foot has the marking of Cupid's unstrung bow.
The moon is considered one of the 'higher' planets and thus people who have done lots of pious activities go there. There they enjoy life by drinking soma-rasa: the taste of moon drink. I think its a drink that gives pleasure and health to the residents there. Since the residents are not recognized by gross senses, people who have supposedly gone there cannot see them or perceive them. Residents in moon simply enjoy life till their pious credits are over and then come back again to earth.
BG 15.14: The potency of vegetables, so essential for strength, health and the pleasures of our palate, is supplied by Krsna. But even eating causes misery without proper digestion. Becoming the fire of digestion called vaisvanara, Krsna alone is the cause of digesting foods such as rice and other enjoyable items. He takes shelter in the stomachs of the living beings, and being engaged with the prana and apana life airs, which enliven the stomach, Krsna brings about the digestion of the four types of food eaten by the living entities. That Visnu alone is the body of the digestive fire is also stated in Vedanta.
Baladeva Vidyabhusana says '..becoming the fire of the stomach, accepting that small body...I bring about the digestion..'. So there is a form of Krsna who becomes the fire of digestion. The scientists cannot perceive Krsna. They can see the effects of Krsna and explain how digestion takes place. But they cannot see the cause behind the effects. They can explain 'how' digestion takes place and not 'why' digestion takes place that way. That 'why' factor is Krsna.
Radhikesh das
Radhikesh prabhu is a legend
You really know your stuff. Thank you so much for the answers, I very much appreciate your help. Please accept my humble obeisances!
COMMENT
While reading Bhagavad-Gita a few days back I came across something very interesting. In chapter 11 Arjuna asks Krishna to show His universal form. It should be noted, however, that Arjuna was not personally interested in seeing the universal form. He was already convinced that Krishna was the Supreme Personality of Godhead. However he knew, in future there would be many people who would claim themselves as Krishna. Thus he wanted all the people to understand that if anybody would claim that he is Krishna then he should be ready to show the universal form. He also wanted to prove it to the people that Krishna not only theoritically proved Himself to be the supreme, but he also practically proved it. A universal form is temporary as the material world is temporary. A devotee is not interested in the universal form, he is only interested in Krishna's personal form as he only wants to give love to Krishna according to his relationship with Him.
It is very important to keep the above in mind as I know so many people who are claiming themselves to be Krishna in India. In South India there is someone called Sathya Sai Baba, who says he is the origianal Krishna himself and he already has millions of devotees. There is also another male personality who says he is an incarnation of Radharani, claiming such, he dances with all the females saying this is rasa dance. Believe me even he managed to get a lot of followers.
Thus I found this very interesting while reading the Bhagavad-Gita.