Higher than Brahma?

[AmbientHound]

Friends, I come again with a question. Is anything higher than Brahma? It is my understanding that it is the ineffable ultimate force behind all, but as I read the Bhagavad-Gita today, I noticed this line in Chapter 11, where Krishna reveals his Universal Form to Arjuna.
kasmac ca te na nameran mahatman
gariyase brahmano 'py adi-kartre
ananta devesa jagan-nivasa
tvam aksaram sad-asat tat param yat

O great one, greater even than Brahma, You are the original creator. Why then should they not offer their respectful obeisances unto You? O limitless one, God of gods, refuge of the universe! You are the invincible source, the cause of all causes, transcendental to this material manifestation.

Is my translation wrong, or is this merely a belief held by those who worship Lord Krishna above others?

 

[Nyingjé Tso]

Vanakkam,

I think you are misunderstanding Brahma and Brahman

While Brahma is one of the Trimurti God, Brahman is the formless, ultimate reality. This is not the same person or thing.

Brahma = God of Creation in the Trimurti. Now not really worshipped anymore.

Brahman = formless, ultimate force and reality behind everything

Aum Namah Shivaya

 

[Vinayaka]

or is this merely a belief held by those who worship Lord Krishna above others?

Yes, some do hold that belief, but it isn't a very common one.

 

[VajraYosid]

As JayaBolenath pointed out, this verse refers to Brahma, the creator god, not Brahman, the cosmic spirit.

'Parabrahman' is the highest; some will equate Parabrahman with a particular supreme deity - Krishna, for instance, and make statements such as "Krishna is greater than Brahman." Usually this goes with a "Paramatman, Brahman, Bhagavan" triunity in which the supreme soul and the cosmic spirit, to the extent that they are different (others don't draw distinction except for explanatory purposes) are seen as united and suborned in Bhagavan - the Supreme Being.

For most sect's views and purposes, Brahman/Parabrahman is supreme, whether seen as ground of being, or being, or both.

Whose translation are you reading?

 

[Valjean]

Brahma is just an aspect, though a major one. He's the Dreamweaver, the creator of Maya, which creates our perception of the material world.

He's part of a triad, though. There's another God that maintains the illusion and a third that unweaves the dream and reveals the undifferentiated, nirguna Reality it's projected on.

 

[Ashoka]

Brahma is an aspect of God as Creator. You could say that people do worship him, though they may call the Creator by another name, like Shiva, Devi, and so forth.

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

Is anything higher than Brahma?
O great one, greater even than Brahma, You are the original creator. Why then should they not offer their respectful obeisances unto You? O limitless one, God of gods, refuge of the universe! You are the invincible source, the cause of all causes, transcendental to this material manifestation.

This is Arjuna speaking here. Arjuna is praying directly to Krishna about Krishna's supreme status.

Brahma is the first progenitor of the 'prajapatis' (progenitors) and 'manu's and 'devas'. Brahma is the first born being. He populated the Universe with lifeforms. It is the Dharma assigned to Brahma.

I would think that if a pilgrim has a Bhagavad-gita to read, then, that seeker can feel that they have arrived at the holy spot.

When you read that verse, what contradiction did you see? In comparison with what differing statements?

I suggest you master the contents of the Gita.

Of course imo it is false to say,

those who worship Lord Krishna above others ...it isn't a very common one...

Bhagavad-gita means 'God's Song', 'Bhagavan's Song', 'Krishna's Oration'.

The gita is actually a chapter in the monumental book called the 'Mahabharata' which translates as, 'The History of Greater India (Bharata)', or, 'Great Bharata', 'Great India'.

So in the Mahabharata, the Gita chapter is seen as the definitive revelation of Krishna as the 'conclusion of the Vedas'.

Of course, the devotees that uphold the revelation of the Gita d iffer from those in history that had conclusions other than 'Vyasadeva's'. 'Vyasadeva' is called the 'literary incarnation of God'. 'Vyasadeva' is the compiler of the Vedic Literatures 5000 yeras ago just as kali-yuga began, and just when the historical necessity to put the Vedas into 'writting' began...people had devolved into having 'short memories' and 'shortened lives'...and those innate human traits would worsen as kali-yuga progressed.

We are so fortunate that the guttenberg press was invented, otherwise how would a copy of the Gita have arrived in your hand?

 

[Maya3]

Friends, I come again with a question. Is anything higher than Brahma? It is my understanding that it is the ineffable ultimate force behind all, but as I read the Bhagavad-Gita today, I noticed this line in Chapter 11, where Krishna reveals his Universal Form to Arjuna.
kasmac ca te na nameran mahatman
gariyase brahmano 'py adi-kartre
ananta devesa jagan-nivasa
tvam aksaram sad-asat tat param yat

O great one, greater even than Brahma, You are the original creator. Why then should they not offer their respectful obeisances unto You? O limitless one, God of gods, refuge of the universe! You are the invincible source, the cause of all causes, transcendental to this material manifestation.

Is my translation wrong, or is this merely a belief held by those who worship Lord Krishna above others?

You could say that here God came in the form of Krishna.
But his true form is something harder to comprehend.

Maya

 

[Jainarayan]

You could say that here God came in the form of Krishna.
But his true form is something harder to comprehend.

Maya

As my signature says:

Jāki rahi bhāvanā jaisi prabhu mūrat dekhi tin taisi (God shows Himself in a way meaningful to the devotee). I believe that also means speaking in the scriptures. To a Shaiva God manifests and speaks as Shiva, to a Shakta God manifests as and speaks as Devi, to Vaishnava, as Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita. An Italian will speak to another Italian in Italian; a Russian to another Russian in Russian... something the listener can relate to. But this is because we puny humans (as Q from Star Trek The Next Generation calls us ) are so limited in understanding, we need to label, categorize and compartmentalize things, even God.

 

[Vinayaka]

Friends, I come again with a question. Is anything higher than Brahma? It is my understanding that it is the ineffable ultimate force behind all, but as I read the Bhagavad-Gita today, I noticed this line in Chapter 11, where Krishna reveals his Universal Form to Arjuna.
kasmac ca te na nameran mahatman
gariyase brahmano 'py adi-kartre
ananta devesa jagan-nivasa
tvam aksaram sad-asat tat param yat

O great one, greater even than Brahma, You are the original creator. Why then should they not offer their respectful obeisances unto You? O limitless one, God of gods, refuge of the universe! You are the invincible source, the cause of all causes, transcendental to this material manifestation.

Is my translation wrong, or is this merely a belief held by those who worship Lord Krishna above others?

I see some of us are unclear as to what is meant. When you say it is the ineffable force behind all, I took it as referring to Brahman, (Parabrahman, ultimate reality) Yet later you are referring to Brahma the creator. So all depending on how or which part of your statement stuck, people answered differently. Maybe you can help us out, now, since you've read some responses.

 

[DavidH]

Brahma = God of Creation in the Trimurti. Now not really worshipped anymore.

Why isn't he worshiped anymore?

 

[VajraYosid]

Good question, no clear answer. Mostly, no significant sect ever formed around him aside from the old Vedic worship which mainlines Prajapati (Brahma's vedic forebear) to some degree.

Perhaps the answer lies there - departure from the Vedas.

 

[Jainarayan]

And then there are the stories (I don't like the word "myths" because of the negative connotation) of his being cursed to not be worshipped for some misbehaviors. Yet, he is usually the presiding deity at the marriages and ceremonies involving other deities. He was one of the deities who tried to calm Narasimha's rage. Hinduism and Hindu beliefs are so vast.

 

[Ashoka]

And then there are the stories (I don't like the word "myths" because of the negative connotation) of his being cursed to not be worshipped for some misbehaviors. Yet, he is usually the presiding deity at the marriages and ceremonies involving other deities. He was one of the deities who tried to calm Narasimha's rage. Hinduism and Hindu beliefs are so vast.

He also tried to reason with Ganesha when he wouldn't let his father (Shiva) back in his home. He always seems like the calmer of the Devas.