Shruti verse request

[Madhuri]

I think that the Bhagavad Gita is very clear about the personal feature being Supreme. But if we go by the Upanishads it is less clear and very open to interpretation and that is why I think both sides have merit. However it is good to keep in mind that not every Hindu bothers with the BG.

 

[chinu]

Does anybody know a verse from Shruti where it is stated that after one attaines the impersonal Absolute, he is never again born?

And does anybody know a verse where it is stated that even when one attains the impersonal Absolute, he then again falls down into material nature?

The one who is Sleep-less needs only Sleeping. Such person never care for to be waken thereafter because that person is "Sleep-less" rather than being "Knowledge-less".

There's no any such verse anywhere, in fact there cannot be any such verse anywhere.. loll

If you are "Impersonal-Absolute-less-person" than of course I can help you. But if you are "Knowledge-less-person" than I cannot help you, In fact nobody can help you.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Following is a verse from the Srimad Bhagavatam.

vadanti tat tattva-vidas
tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
brahmeti paramātmeti
bhagavān iti śabdyate​

S.B. 1.2.11​

vadanti—they say; tat—that; tattva-vidaḥ—the learned souls; tattvam—the Absolute Truth; yat—which; jñānam—knowledge; advayam—nondual; brahma iti—known as Brahman; paramātmā iti—known as Paramātmā; bhagavān iti—known as Bhagavān; śabdyate—it so sounded.

Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān.

Depending upon the qualification one has acquired, a person realizes the three aspects of the Ultimate Reality - Brahman (impersonal manifestation), Paramātamā (partial manifestation), and Bhagavāna (the Supreme Personality of Godhead).

The scriptures give the example of the Sun. The Sun has three aspects. The one who studies sunshine is a beginner. An advanced student will see the sun as a planet. A further advanced student will realize the Sun to have a presiding deity - the Sun god who resides within the sun globe.

All the Vedic scriptures are intended to take us from one level to the next systematically, to ultimately realize the Ultimate Reality.

Just like a high school student is not expected to understand the Einstein's theory of relativity as he lacks the necessary qualification, even though he may have heard of the subject, similarly one should acquire the necessary qualification to realize the highest - the Ultimate Reality.

:namaste

 

[Jainarayan]

Oh yeh!!!!
I remember now. Ok it's true, ISKCON does promote the idea that the soul can again fall down from the spiritual world- which means even Vaikuntha and Brahman.

But they are unique in this. The other Gaudiya Vaishnava schools do not agree with this idea. So to anyone reading this: don't base your understanding of the teachings of Caitanya Mahaprabhu on ISKCON.

Exactly. I think the thing is that ISKCON has a huge publicity campaign and notoriety it's easy to think they are representative of Vaishnavism, and even all of Gaudiya.

 

[Jainarayan]

It's very possible that the ISKCON idea of falling down after achieving Vaikunta is a "folk" interpretation of something else. It's may be not unlike the game of telephone. By the time a comment gets from the first person to the 20th, it is nothing like the original comment. This is all the more possible because of the verses from Prabhupada's translation and purports we're referring to. I used that one early on to show that even he said the jiva does not take rebirth after attaining Brahman. Hence my belief that it's a corruption of something, and entered the common thought.

 

[Stormcry]

Following is a verse from the Srimad Bhagavatam.

vadanti tat tattva-vidas
tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
brahmeti paramātmeti
bhagavān iti śabdyate​

S.B. 1.2.11​

vadanti—they say; tat—that; tattva-vidaḥ—the learned souls; tattvam—the Absolute Truth; yat—which; jñānam—knowledge; advayam—nondual; brahma iti—known as Brahman; paramātmā iti—known as Paramātmā; bhagavān iti—known as Bhagavān; śabdyate—it so sounded.

Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān.

Depending upon the qualification one has acquired, a person realizes the three aspects of the Ultimate Reality - Brahman (impersonal manifestation), Paramātamā (partial manifestation), and Bhagavāna (the Supreme Personality of Godhead).

Complete misunderstanding. That Bhagavata verse doesn't say that Bhagavan has three aspects. With sound understanding we come to know that truth is tattva and tatva has no any form. However sages who know Brahma calls that pure tattva, the truth by different names like Brahma, paramatma or Bhagavan.

All the Vedic scriptures are intended to take us from one level to the next systematically, to ultimately realize the Ultimate Reality.

There are 1000 of shruti-smruti verses standing to posit jiva is Brahman.

Just like a high school student is not expected to understand the Einstein's theory of relativity as he lacks the necessary qualification, even though he may have heard of the subject, similarly one should acquire the necessary qualification to realize the highest - the Ultimate Reality.

:namaste

Yes, even as high school students can't perceive bigger theories, some people can't imagine or think about brahman.For them, with mercy, sages describe that Brahman as Bhagavan.Exalted sages directly meditate on Brahman, which is the hardest job, while for those whose mind is not pure for them Saguna worship is prescribed. The journey is from Saguna to Nirguna. The peak of devotion of devotion is to realize the Vishnu as the self. Bhagavan says in Gita " After acquiring devotion, he enters into the supreme ( merges in Brahman)

 

[atanu]

Actually that is incorrect(sorry)

Genesis 1:27

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Essentially God is supposed to look very similar if not EXACTLY as Humans do.

Actually that incorrect (sorry). :yes:

Before first knowing God's form how do we know what actually is our form?

 

[atanu]

Indeed Shantoham has sharp eyes. I did not want to mention ISKCON because I didn't want to provoke any hot debates, as I did with my last thread about Prabhupada. I admit, I thought I understood everything, and then my ISKCONite friend started telling me about Prabhupada and it just doesn't fit into the picture. Now I don't know what I should believe because the view of Advaita and that of ISKCON are so contradictory. My own reason and logic points me towards Advaita, but how can I know if my mind isn't deluding me?

do you see why it was important for me to 'refute' Prabhupada?

Anadi? Are you same Anadi of HDF?

 

[Stormcry]

Namaste Vrindavana Dasa.....

The unity of Atma and Brahma is famous in Upanishads and Puranas. One of my favourite quote from Vishnu Purana :

विभेदजनकेऽज्ञाने नाशमात्यन्तिकं गते
आत्मनो ब्रम्हणो भेदमसन्तं क: करिष्यति ।। विष्णु पुराण 6.7.96 ।।

Meaning: After the complete annihilation of dualistic ignorance, who'll think the difference between Atma and Brahman, which is completely false....

What do you say about this Verse?

 

[atanu]

Does anybody know a verse from Shruti where it is stated that after one attaines the impersonal Absolute, he is never again born?

And does anybody know a verse where it is stated that even when one attains the impersonal Absolute, he then again falls down into material nature?

If anybody does please be so kind to post it here. Thank you. :namaste
(Smriti would also be acceptable, but Shruti is a higher authority so...)

I have not read the whole thread. But what do you understand by impersonal Absolute?

 

[Stormcry]

My own reason and logic points me towards Advaita, but how can I know if my mind isn't deluding me?

Believe me you're not getting deluded. For your confirmation, I've posted pramana from Vishnu Purana #69 post, wherein it is stated that seeing the difference between Atma and Brahman is because of Ignorance / delusion of Mind. Why can't you guys see the Truth? Why are you confused, my friend?

 

[atanu]

HK, I think that one must first understand what OP MEANT by 'impersonal Absolute' before even this can be answered.

Many erroneously think that Shankara taught merging with the un-manifest (mula prakriti). So, it is best to get clarification first, IMO.

 

[Stormcry]

HK, I think that one must first understand what OP MEANT by 'impersonal Absolute' before even this can be answered.

Many erroneously think that Shankara taught merging with the un-manifest (mula prakriti). So, it is best to get clarification first, IMO.

As per Iskconites, Impersonal Brahman is the Brahman wherein person looses his individuality and remain as a spark of BrahmaJyoti. However they do differentiate between impersonal and Pradhana as they're talking about living as a spark.

Yes, there are two unmanifests. One is lower unmanifestation where all Jivas merges after the Pralaya or after the end of day of Brahma and there is another higher unmanifestation than this and it is Brahman itself. Intelligents know it as Avyakta. Bhagavan says in Gita " This higher unmanifestation is my supreme abode. "

 

[atanu]

As per Iskconites, Impersonal Brahman is the Brahman wherein person looses his individuality and remain as a spark of BrahmaJyoti. However they do differentiate between impersonal and Pradhana as they're talking about living as a spark.

Yes, there are two unmanifests. One is lower unmanifestation where all Jivas merges after the Pralaya or after the end of day of Brahma and there is another higher unmanifestation than this and it is Brahman itself. Intelligents know it as Avyakta. Bhagavan says in Gita " This higher unmanifestation is my supreme abode. "

Akshara avyakta is the goal. ISKCON talks of merging in brahmjyoti, which is as vague as it can get. I wish to hear from anadi as to what he understands by impersonal Absolute.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Namaste Vrindavana Dasa.....

The unity of Atma and Brahma is famous in Upanishads and Puranas. One of my favourite quote from Vishnu Purana :

विभेदजनकेऽज्ञाने नाशमात्यन्तिकं गते
आत्मनो ब्रम्हणो भेदमसन्तं क: करिष्यति ।। विष्णु पुराण 6.7.96 ।।

Meaning: After the complete annihilation of dualistic ignorance, who'll think the difference between Atma and Brahman, which is completely false....

What do you say about this Verse?

There is no difference between ātmā and Brahman, just like there is no difference between the sunshine and the Sun. A particle of the Sun (sunshine) is the same as Sun - heat and light. Similarly, both ātmā and Brahman are sat-chit-ānanda - eternity, knowledge and bliss principle.

However, sunshine does not qualify as the Sun. One is minute and the other is huge. Similarly, the Brahman and the soul being the same in constitution - sat-chit-ānanda, are different as one (Brahman) is infinite and the other (soul) is infinitesimal.

This is acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. The doctorine of inconcievable simultaneous oneness and difference which has been preached by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

:namaste

 

[Stormcry]

Similarly, the Brahman and the soul being the same in constitution - sat-chit-ānanda, are different as one (Brahman) is infinite and the other (soul) is infinitesimal.

That verse doesn't say that soul is same as Brahman. It says Brahman is indifferent from Atma. There's no trace of Achintya Bhedabheda in any scripture. Scriptures never say Atma is qualitatively same as Brahma. There's a big difference between saying Atma is qualitatively same as Brahman and Atma is Brahman itself. You know, such understanding is a matter of common sense.

This is acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. The doctorine of inconcievable simultaneous oneness and difference which has been preached by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

:namaste

Achintya Bhedabheda theory is found only in Chaitanya Charitamruta and it's not part of Any Samhita or Purana. Shruti and Puranas have authority over the subject of Atma or Brahman.

 

[Stormcry]

I wish to hear from anadi as to what he understands by impersonal Absolute.

As mentioned by him in 2nd post, Impersonal Brahman is devoid of qualities. It's the Brahman which Advaitavadi talks about. It's formless Brahman and Anadi has been confused whether one returns to material nature or not and I guess this confusion is caused by Gaudiyas Belief of returning of person from Brahmajyoti wherein he's merged and lives as a spark of light.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

The soul & Brahman are non-different (advaita/non-dual) as both are sat-chit-ānanda in nature.
They are not same (dvaita/dual) as one is infinite and one is infinitesimal.

The scriptures are transcendental - beyond the modes of material nature. However, just like a person wearing red/green/blue glasses will see everything as red/green/blue respectively, similarly one in sattva-guna/rajo-guna/tamo-guna will understand and interpret that same transcendental Vedic knowledge in different ways. All are correct from their perspective. Yet all are incorrect.

The Lord is celebrated as Para-brahm (beyond Brahman) Parameśwar (Supreme controller) as He is higher than Brahman.

That said, we all have been awarded a free-will by the Lord, and we can exercise our freedom to accept or reject any doctrine or philosophy.

I have nothing more to say on the subject.

:namaste

 

[anadi]

Anadi? Are you same Anadi of HDF?

What's HDF? Probably not.

I have not read the whole thread. But what do you understand by impersonal Absolute?

It is pure infinity, formless, devoid of qualities, time and space. The source of consciousness. That which is beyond description because it is beyond duality, and the mind cannot grasp that.

I don't understand Srila Prabhupada when he says that the soul get's lonely and thus returns, and his comparison with the husband and wife in seperate rooms. How can you compare the fenomenal world with that wich is time-less? There is no time there, so how would one get lonly after a while as he says?

 

[Kalidas]

What's HDF? Probably not.



It is pure infinity, formless, devoid of qualities, time and space. The source of consciousness. That which is beyond description because it is beyond duality, and the mind cannot grasp that.

I don't understand Srila Prabhupada when he says that the soul get's lonely and thus returns, and his comparison with the husband and wife in seperate rooms. How can you compare the fenomenal world with that wich is time-less? There is no time there, so how would one get lonly after a while as he says?

I'm going to agree with you on this one. I don't feel those are very good arguments. It's applying human logic to that which is not human. Yes humans get lonely, they get bored, they are social creatures. Yet can these same qualities apply to a soul? I don't know maybe maybe not, it's not something I'm going to assert that I know. If say all creatures have souls as MANY scriptures say why do animals never get bored or lonely? There are MANY animals that live entirely in solitude.