I am new to this, is Krishna God like the God the Christians and Jews worship? Is Krishna just another word for God?
Thanks
David
You need to be a member of ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT to add comments!
This reply was deleted.
I am new to this, is Krishna God like the God the Christians and Jews worship? Is Krishna just another word for God?
Thanks
David
You need to be a member of ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT to add comments!
Replies
Dear traves troy I don' mean to offend u but bg chapter 9 sloka 11 krishna says "only fools deride me when i descend in human form they donot know my transcendental nature and my supreme dominion over all . So that's krishnaa reply to ur assumptions on krishna that hes god of flesh etc etc....the impersonal feature is only the first step of realisation. One needs to progess further to know parmatma features and finally bhagwaan. Ur not taught PhD in school so don' consider that upanishad verse as full and final. Prabhupada has given the example of sun. U have only studied it' rays. U need to study it' disc and finally the inner matter
Devotees recegnize* /interpret to we interpret such un-comparable activities preformed by Krishna to be overt and obveus conformations thay indeed Krishna is The-One who is withOut a second! ? The Orriginal God, the head of all Gods the formoust & most impressive feature within all the multiple creations. If He proclaimed that all things immanate from He HimSelf and only exist at all by taking exclusive shelter within Him personaly. You can comfortably rest assured that, that is exactly what He ment. Only a fool would interpret' their speck-like knowledge of something as unknowable* as Krishna's external immanence and or potancys to be beyound Krishna's absolute understanding, athoraty or comprehinsabale abilitys of explanation. Travus Troy it's time you stoped your speculations Because Daddy's Home to stay.
Saveyours of this filthy rag of an gosh offel filthy-rag of a world Ah'nunti'coti'vishnahvas
Key jiiiii
Now those are some sweet words comin' outta your mouth. You call yourself a devotee and yet couldn't discard anger from your life. So sad. lol
Hare Krishna
@ Travis Troy, "But hardly anywhere in the big scriptures (Vedas , Upanishads or Puranas) the name Krishna is mentioned as the original form of God, from which everything emanated. NO."
Srimad Bhagavata Puran 1.3.28
ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ
kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam
indrāri-vyākulaṁ lokaṁ
mṛḍayanti yuge yuge
SYNONYMS
ete—all these; ca—and; aṁśa—plenary portions; kalāḥ—portions of the plenary portions; puṁsaḥ—of the Supreme; kṛṣṇaḥ—Lord Kṛṣṇa; tu—but; bhagavān—the Personality of Godhead; svayam—in person; indra-ari—the enemies of Indra; vyākulam—disturbed; lokam—all the planets; mṛḍayanti—gives protection; yuge yuge—in different ages.
TRANSLATION
All of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on planets whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists. The Lord incarnates to protect the theists.
---------------------
Srimad Bhagavata Puran 1.3.28
vadanti tat tattva-vidas
tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
brahmeti paramātmeti
bhagavān iti śabdyate
SYNONYMS
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.
TRANSLATION
Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān.
"Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān." The Absolute Truth appears to neophytes as impersonal Brahman and to advanced mystic yogīs as Paramātmā, the Supersoul, but devotees, who are further advanced, understand the Absolute Truth as the Supreme Lord, Viṣṇu.
* vadanti tat tattva-vidas
Srimad Bhagavata Puran - 1.2.11
@ Bharat, when Krishna says in verse 14.27 that He is the abode of Brahman ... HE didn't mean his personal feature is the source of his nirguna feature. It means here that his saguna form IS the nirguna form. HE is situated (prathistitha) in the formless Brahman. HE is the coin, that has two sides. One side has form. The other is void of it.
Too bad your guru translator couldn't understand this simple truth.
Nah, i'm reading the right ones. Too bad you guys have been brainwashed into believing that only Prabhupada's translations are authorized. Guess what, it isn't.
Hare Krsna
Sure for mayavadis may consider the mayavada interpretation as right.
But for everyone else mayavada is false.
We believe Srila Prabhupada translations are authorized. Vaishnava translations by Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya etc are all authorized. But we also know that mayavada translations are not.
Hare Krsna
But for everyone else mayavada is false.
Everyone else?... Are u sure?... Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Islam, Christianity. They all believe in a formless God and so does the nirguna hindu worshippers. Such a path is a false one now just coz your cult thinks so?
Krishna the manifested form of Para-Brahm, introduced both yoga and bhakti system.
By indirectly saying, that Krishna's shown yoga path is a faulty one, you are committing blasphemy. In gita chapter 8 verse 9, Krishna used the word achintya-rupam to describe his Brahman feauture. He meant to say, a rupa which cannot be imagined. Here Krishna was speaking of HIS formless Brahman state, and not his manifested state, as all his manifested vyakta-rupas that we know of, CAN be imagined.
And yet your translator twisted the meaning of achintya rupam, saying in the commentary that we humans can never fully understand God.
Yes we humans can never understand God fully since no human can. But that's not the meaning of achintya rupam here. The actual meaning is, a form that cannot be imagined or thought of.
If Krishna was pointing towards his vyakta personal form, then He wouldn't have used the word achintya rupam, since we can all think or imagine his personal form. Here even a 10 year old would understand that Krishna was speaking of his formless Brahman aspect.
Hare Krsna
Are u sure?... Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Islam, Christianity. They all believe in a formless God and so does the nirguna hindu worshippers. Such a path is a false one now just coz your cult thinks so?
Yes, mayavada is false.
Considering god formless is not incorrect. What is incorrect is considering god to be only formless. What is incorrect is to consider personality of godhead as a temporary manifestation. what is incorrect is to consider formless manifestation or brahman as the origin of personality of Godhead. What is incorrect is to consider formless manifestation as highest manifestation of supreme absolute truth.
By indirectly saying, that Krishna's shown yoga path is a faulty one, you are committing blasphemy.
I never said Krsn's shown yoga path is faulty one. I only said that your mayavada interpretation of Krsna's shown path is incorrect.
Krishna used the word achintya-rupa to describe his Brahman feature. He meant to say, a rupa which cannot be imagined. Here Krishna was speaking of HIS formless Brahman state
It seems that due to extraordinary mental speculation the mayavadis cannot even understand simple words.
Acintya rupam. Rupam means form. Why 10 year old ask 4 year old - What rupam means ? It means form or shape. And your mayavada interpretation is that acintya rupma refers to formless brahman state. Such pathetic translation.
When mayavadis say things like these - Saguna is nirguna, rupam means formless, I feel the need to ask do u even know language, words ? Saguna means saguna. Rupam means form. You cant change the language, meanings just to misinterpret and suit it according to you bogus mayavada philosophy and accuse others.
Param Vijayate Sri Krsna sankirtnama
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 6 Next