Formlessness means - Revision history

Vanibot: Vanibot #0019: LinkReviser - Revised links and redirected them to the de facto address when redirect exists

2018-05-16T22:25:14Z

Vanibot #0019: LinkReviser - Revised links and redirected them to the de facto address when redirect exists

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:25, 16 May 2018
Line 3:		Line 3:
	{{terms\|"formlessness means"}}		{{terms\|"formlessness means"}}
	{{notes\|}}		{{notes\|}}
	{{compiler\|Vaishnavi}}		{{compiler\|Vaishnavi\|Rishab}}
	{{complete\|ALL}}		{{complete\|ALL}}
	{{first\|23Nov12}}		{{first\|23Nov12}}
	{{last\|~~23Nov12~~}}		{{last\|07Dec12}}
	{{totals_by_section\|BG=0\|SB=0\|CC=0\|OB=0\|Lec=1\|Con=0\|Let=0}}		{{totals_by_section\|BG=0\|SB=0\|CC=0\|OB=0\|Lec=1\|Con=0\|Let=0}}
	{{total\|1}}		{{total\|1}}
	{{toc right}}		{{toc right}}
	[[Category:Formless\|3]]		[[Category:Formless\|3]]
	~~[[Category:not\|3]]~~
	[[Category:Vaniquotes English Dictionary A to Z]]		[[Category:Vaniquotes English Dictionary A to Z]]
	[[Category:Vaniquotes English Dictionary D-E-F]]		[[Category:Vaniquotes English Dictionary D-E-F]]
Line 25:		Line 24:
	<p>Prabhupāda: Hm? What is that?</p>		<p>Prabhupāda: Hm? What is that?</p>
	<p>Pañcadraviḍa: Why should we adore the idol if God has no form?</p>		<p>Pañcadraviḍa: Why should we adore the idol if God has no form?</p>
	<p>Prabhupāda: Who says God has no form? God is the supreme father. You know your father has form. What the supreme father has done that He'll not have form? Your father has got form. You're born of him. Then why the supreme father will not have form? What fault He has done? What is this logic? God is supposed to..., the supreme father. Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1\|SB 1.1.1]]). That is the Vedic information. The Supreme is that which is the source of everything. So we have got varieties of forms, and why the source should be formless? Why? What is the logic? We have got so many forms—8,400,000—and Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā: ([[Vanisource:BG 14.4\|BG 14.4]]) "Of all these forms of life, I am the seed-giving father." The seed-giving father, Kṛṣṇa, has form, and His sons have got form. Why the father should be formless? What is this logic? Eh? What is this logic—can anyone say?—that because He's father, therefore He should be formless. What is this logic? The father must have form. Otherwise how many form... All these forms, wherefrom it is coming? Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja pradaḥ pitā. He is the father. If the sons have form, why the father will not have form? What is this logic? This is not logical conclusion. The real idea is... Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "My dear Arjuna, you, Me, and all these kings and soldiers who have assembled here, they were in the past like this," that means they have forms, "and they're existing like this. And they'll continue to exist." Where is formless? You see the (indistinct) Bhagavad-gītā. He says in the past all of them existed like this, and we're existing now like this, past present, and in the future they'll continue. So where is formlessness? There is no question of formlessness. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). When there is such question, formlessness means that is not material form. But there is form. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), vigraha means form. But that is sat-cid-ānanda, eternal, full of bliss, and full of knowledge. This is not this form. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritaḥ, paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto: ([[Vanisource:BG 9.11\|BG 9.11]]) "These rascals, they do not know what I am. Therefore he's thinking that My form and his form is the same." Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā, unless one is mūḍha, he cannot say that God is formless. God has form. But His form is different from our form, this material form. Sat-cit-ānanda-vigraha. So therefore, we have to learn all these things by mahat-sevā dvāraṁ vimukteḥ. We can get out of all this ignorance when we are engaged in mahat-sevā. Otherwise we shall remain in the darkness. Kṛṣṇa has form, but His form is different from our, this material form. That is (indistinct).</p>		<p>Prabhupāda: Who says God has no form? God is the supreme father. You know your father has form. What the supreme father has done that He'll not have form? Your father has got form. You're born of him. Then why the supreme father will not have form? What fault He has done? What is this logic? God is supposed to..., the supreme father. Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1\|SB 1.1.1]]). That is the Vedic information. The Supreme is that which is the source of everything. So we have got varieties of forms, and why the source should be formless? Why? What is the logic? We have got so many forms—8,400,000—and Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā: ([[Vanisource:BG 14.4 (1972)\|BG 14.4]]) "Of all these forms of life, I am the seed-giving father." The seed-giving father, Kṛṣṇa, has form, and His sons have got form. Why the father should be formless? What is this logic? Eh? What is this logic—can anyone say?—that because He's father, therefore He should be formless. What is this logic? The father must have form. Otherwise how many form... All these forms, wherefrom it is coming? Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja pradaḥ pitā. He is the father. If the sons have form, why the father will not have form? What is this logic? This is not logical conclusion. The real idea is... Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "My dear Arjuna, you, Me, and all these kings and soldiers who have assembled here, they were in the past like this," that means they have forms, "and they're existing like this. And they'll continue to exist." Where is formless? You see the (indistinct) Bhagavad-gītā. He says in the past all of them existed like this, and we're existing now like this, past present, and in the future they'll continue. So where is formlessness? There is no question of formlessness. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). When there is such question, formlessness means that is not material form. But there is form. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), vigraha means form. But that is sat-cid-ānanda, eternal, full of bliss, and full of knowledge. This is not this form. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritaḥ, paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto: ([[Vanisource:BG 9.11 (1972)\|BG 9.11]]) "These rascals, they do not know what I am. Therefore he's thinking that My form and his form is the same." Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā, unless one is mūḍha, he cannot say that God is formless. God has form. But His form is different from our form, this material form. Sat-cit-ānanda-vigraha. So therefore, we have to learn all these things by mahat-sevā dvāraṁ vimukteḥ. We can get out of all this ignorance when we are engaged in mahat-sevā. Otherwise we shall remain in the darkness. Kṛṣṇa has form, but His form is different from our, this material form. That is (indistinct).</p>
	</div>		</div>
	</div>		</div>
	</div>		</div>

Vaishnavi: Created page with '

{{terms|"formlessness means"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|Vaishnavi}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|23Nov12}} {{last|23Nov12}} {{totals_by_section|B…'

2012-11-23T09:27:44Z

Created page with '<div id="compilation"> <div id="facts"> {{terms|"formlessness means"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|Vaishnavi}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|23Nov12}} {{last|23Nov12}} {{totals_by_section|B…'

New page

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"formlessness means"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Vaishnavi}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|23Nov12}}
{{last|23Nov12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Formless|3]]
[[Category:not|3]]
[[Category:Vaniquotes English Dictionary A to Z]]
[[Category:Vaniquotes English Dictionary D-E-F]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB552HyderabadApril121975_0" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="528" link="Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975" link_text="Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975">
<div class="heading">When there is such question, formlessness means that is not material form.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975|Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 12, 1975]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Acyutānanda: When I visited the Hare Kṛṣṇa center I thought that God had no form. In such case why should we garnish the idol of Kṛṣṇa with jewelry and adore the idol?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm? What is that?</p>
<p>Pañcadraviḍa: Why should we adore the idol if God has no form?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Who says God has no form? God is the supreme father. You know your father has form. What the supreme father has done that He'll not have form? Your father has got form. You're born of him. Then why the supreme father will not have form? What fault He has done? What is this logic? God is supposed to..., the supreme father. Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1|SB 1.1.1]]). That is the Vedic information. The Supreme is that which is the source of everything. So we have got varieties of forms, and why the source should be formless? Why? What is the logic? We have got so many forms—8,400,000—and Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā: ([[Vanisource:BG 14.4|BG 14.4]]) "Of all these forms of life, I am the seed-giving father." The seed-giving father, Kṛṣṇa, has form, and His sons have got form. Why the father should be formless? What is this logic? Eh? What is this logic—can anyone say?—that because He's father, therefore He should be formless. What is this logic? The father must have form. Otherwise how many form... All these forms, wherefrom it is coming? Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ bīja pradaḥ pitā. He is the father. If the sons have form, why the father will not have form? What is this logic? This is not logical conclusion. The real idea is... Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "My dear Arjuna, you, Me, and all these kings and soldiers who have assembled here, they were in the past like this," that means they have forms, "and they're existing like this. And they'll continue to exist." Where is formless? You see the (indistinct) Bhagavad-gītā. He says in the past all of them existed like this, and we're existing now like this, past present, and in the future they'll continue. So where is formlessness? There is no question of formlessness. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). When there is such question, formlessness means that is not material form. But there is form. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), vigraha means form. But that is sat-cid-ānanda, eternal, full of bliss, and full of knowledge. This is not this form. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritaḥ, paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto: ([[Vanisource:BG 9.11|BG 9.11]]) "These rascals, they do not know what I am. Therefore he's thinking that My form and his form is the same." Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā, unless one is mūḍha, he cannot say that God is formless. God has form. But His form is different from our form, this material form. Sat-cit-ānanda-vigraha. So therefore, we have to learn all these things by mahat-sevā dvāraṁ vimukteḥ. We can get out of all this ignorance when we are engaged in mahat-sevā. Otherwise we shall remain in the darkness. Kṛṣṇa has form, but His form is different from our, this material form. That is (indistinct).</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Formlessness means - Revision history

Vanibot: Vanibot #0019: LinkReviser - Revised links and redirected them to the de facto address when redirect exists

Vaishnavi: Created page with ' {{terms|"formlessness means"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|Vaishnavi}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|23Nov12}} {{last|23Nov12}} {{totals_by_section|B…'

Vaishnavi: Created page with '

{{terms|"formlessness means"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|Vaishnavi}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|23Nov12}} {{last|23Nov12}} {{totals_by_section|B…'