Question: Resting and Not Resting in KrishnaI have a question concerning Bhagavad-gita chapter 9 text 5 and 6. In text 5 Lord Krishna states, "And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me." And in text 6 He says "all created beings rest in Me."I've read the purports of both texts, and still I'm confused about what appears to be a contradiction within these texts. Gurudeva, please enlighten me as to the meaning of these two texts in relation to each other.Looking forward with great anticipation to your reply,Hare KrishnaAnswer: Both Are True. Here's How:According to the Bhagavad-gita the reality is that everything rests in Krishna and also does not rest in Krishna. So what is the meaning? Everything rests in Krishna in the sense that everything is resting in Krishna's energy, which is Him in the sense that it is non-different from Him being His expanded energy. But yet everything does not rest in Krishna personally because He is separately situated, enjoying life in Goloka Vrindavana surrounded by His loving devotees.When you read such statements simply consider that Krishna's energy is Krishna and is not Krishna both at the same time like the sun and the sunshine. The sunshine is nothing but the sun, but yet is separately situated from the sun. This comparison will help you to resolve the apparent contradictions and clearly understand the meaning.Hari Bol …http://harekrishnaharekrishna.ning.com/forum/
You need to be a member of ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT to add comments!
Everything created reside within Lord, even spiritual eternal world.
What do you think, where Dantavakra and Shishupala entered when killed by Lord ?
They are Jaya and Vijaya ,doorkeepers on Vaikuntha, and when they are killed by Krishna they returned to Vaikuntha by entering Krishnas body, because Vaikuntha resides withing His body.
SB 10.78.10 — A most subtle and wondrous spark of light then [rose from the demon’s body and] entered Lord Kṛṣṇa while everyone looked on, O King, just as when Śiśupāla was killed.
.
Goloka Vrindavana is also inside Him
.
SB 10.8.37-39 — When Kṛṣṇa opened His mouth wide by the order of mother Yaśodā, she saw within His mouth all moving and nonmoving entities, outer space, and all directions, along with mountains, islands, oceans, the surface of the earth, the blowing wind, fire, the moon and the stars. She saw the planetary systems, water, light, air, sky, and creation by transformation of ahaṅkāra. She also saw the senses, the mind, sense perception, and the three qualities, goodness, passion and ignorance. She saw the time allotted for the living entities, she saw natural instinct and the reactions of karma, and she saw desires and different varieties of bodies, moving and nonmoving. Seeing all these aspects of the cosmic manifestation, along with herself and Vṛndāvana-dhāma, she became doubtful and fearful of her son’s nature.
.
Considering all that, He is everything and nothing can exist without Him.
.
SB 11.16.38 — As the Supreme Lord, I am the basis of the living entity, of the modes of nature and of the mahat-tattva. Thus I am everything, and nothing whatsoever can exist without Me.
.
Srimad Bhagavatam is clear and logical, there is no contrary statements, thats why im considering Him authentic and bonafide scripture. On another side, Mahabharata and other puranas didnt have such a luck.
A brief analysis of Bhagavad-gita 9.4, 9.5, and 9.6.
The Bhagavad-gita is one of the world’s perennial wisdom texts. Because it offers knowledge of the Absolute Truth, some of its texts can be difficult to understand. Few are as difficult as verses four and five of Chapter Nine: "By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them. And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation."
What is Krishna saying here? First of all, He says that in His unmanifested form (avyakta murti, or Brahman) He pervades the universe. Clear enough: God is all-pervading. Then Krishna says that all beings are in Him. Okay, if He's everywhere, then all beings exist in Him. No problem. But then it gets somewhat perplexing: He says He is not in them.
This is the beginning of the difficult part. Anyone who has even casually studied the Gita—particularly Srila Prabhupada's Bhagavad-gita As It Is—knows that God is in everything as the Supersoul, known in Sanskrit as the Paramatma. So what does Krishna mean by saying "I am not in them," when His presence in everything is confirmed throughout the Vedic literature?
After He disavows his presence in all beings, He says that everything does not rest in Him. This is in stark contradiction to His statement in the previous verse, wherein He boldly declares the opposite. Even Baladeva Vidyabhushana, the renowned eighteenth-century Gaudiya Vaishnava commentator, asserts that this is a contradiction and that a serious student of the Gita must ask, "How might one resolve it?"
Indeed, Baladeva suggests that when Krishna says “Behold My mystic opulence” (pashya me yogam aishvaram), He is attempting to resolve the contradiction. Baladeva admits, however, that this is not resolution in any true sense but rather a proclamation that human words cannot actually explain the Lord: God has inconceivable potency (acintya-shakti).
Clearly, God is not bound by our mundane sense of logic. He is the creator of logic and, as such, transcends it. Thus, He is the Lord of paradox. According to the dictionary, a paradox is a seeming contradiction that is nonetheless true; it is something that exhibits inexplicable or contradictory aspects. Here's an example from the poetess Mary Shelley: “The silence of midnight, to speak truly, though apparently a paradox, rung in my ears.”
Are you directing this question to Sanjay Krishna Panda, the thread starter or to me? If you are referring this question to me. My answer is yes. Not money but my time, effort informing people about the Hare Krishna movement. From 1986 to the present. If these are converted to money, it`s heavy indeed.
Replies
What do you think, where Dantavakra and Shishupala entered when killed by Lord ?
They are Jaya and Vijaya ,doorkeepers on Vaikuntha, and when they are killed by Krishna they returned to Vaikuntha by entering Krishnas body, because Vaikuntha resides withing His body.
Krishna, Lord of Paradox
By Satyaraja Dasa
A brief analysis of Bhagavad-gita 9.4, 9.5, and 9.6.
The Bhagavad-gita is one of the world’s perennial wisdom texts. Because it offers knowledge of the Absolute Truth, some of its texts can be difficult to understand. Few are as difficult as verses four and five of Chapter Nine: "By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them. And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation."
What is Krishna saying here? First of all, He says that in His unmanifested form (avyakta murti, or Brahman) He pervades the universe. Clear enough: God is all-pervading. Then Krishna says that all beings are in Him. Okay, if He's everywhere, then all beings exist in Him. No problem. But then it gets somewhat perplexing: He says He is not in them.
This is the beginning of the difficult part. Anyone who has even casually studied the Gita—particularly Srila Prabhupada's Bhagavad-gita As It Is—knows that God is in everything as the Supersoul, known in Sanskrit as the Paramatma. So what does Krishna mean by saying "I am not in them," when His presence in everything is confirmed throughout the Vedic literature?
After He disavows his presence in all beings, He says that everything does not rest in Him. This is in stark contradiction to His statement in the previous verse, wherein He boldly declares the opposite. Even Baladeva Vidyabhushana, the renowned eighteenth-century Gaudiya Vaishnava commentator, asserts that this is a contradiction and that a serious student of the Gita must ask, "How might one resolve it?"
Indeed, Baladeva suggests that when Krishna says “Behold My mystic opulence” (pashya me yogam aishvaram), He is attempting to resolve the contradiction. Baladeva admits, however, that this is not resolution in any true sense but rather a proclamation that human words cannot actually explain the Lord: God has inconceivable potency (acintya-shakti).
Clearly, God is not bound by our mundane sense of logic. He is the creator of logic and, as such, transcends it. Thus, He is the Lord of paradox. According to the dictionary, a paradox is a seeming contradiction that is nonetheless true; it is something that exhibits inexplicable or contradictory aspects. Here's an example from the poetess Mary Shelley: “The silence of midnight, to speak truly, though apparently a paradox, rung in my ears.”
http://btg.krishna.com/krishna-lord-paradox
have you given any heavy donations to iskcon?
Are you directing this question to Sanjay Krishna Panda, the thread starter or to me? If you are referring this question to me. My answer is yes. Not money but my time, effort informing people about the Hare Krishna movement. From 1986 to the present. If these are converted to money, it`s heavy indeed.