Category:God Is Not Formless: Difference between revisions
Visnu Murti (talk | contribs) Created page with "# Category:God Is Not... - Umbrella Category Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes Category:Wanted Categories - Vaniquotes" |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:God | [[Category:God]] | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:God Is Not]] | ||
[[Category:Formless]] | |||
[[Category:Krsna Is Not Formless]] | |||
[[Category:God - Umbrella Category]] | |||
[[Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes]] | [[Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes]] | ||
Revision as of 08:42, 13 June 2020
Pages in category "God Is Not Formless"
The following 21 pages are in this category, out of 21 total.
F
- Factually, the Lord is not formless, nor does He belong to any of the multiforms experienced within the universal forms. One should try to know the truth about the Lord by following the instruction of Brahmaji
- Formless is not the actual realization of God. That is the beginning. That may be beginning. To realize the energy of God, that is formless. Just like the sun. The sunshine is formless, but the sun globe is not formless
H
- Here is a description of the transcendental and eternal form of the Absolute Personality of Godhead. The Supreme Lord is not formless. He has His own transcendental form, which is not at all similar to the forms of the mundane world
- How can one think of the Lord as being without form? How can one become formless and at the same time have all intelligence and consciousness, direct and indirect? So there are many things for a pure devotee to learn
I
- In any case, He is never a formless void. Ignorance is the back of the Lord, and therefore the ignorance of the less intelligent class of men is also not separate from His bodily conception
- In the Vedic language, when it is said nirakara - nirakara means "Who has no form" - it does not mean that God has no form. He has got form, but His form is different from this form upon which you have got experience
- Isvarah paramah krsnah. Sac-cid-ananda-vigrahah. Vigrah ka arth hota hai Form. but he is not formless, not without form. it is told, the meaning of statue is having form. Formlessness. Formless is another feature, but real feature is Syamasundara
T
- That the Lord is not formless is experienced by Narada Muni. But His form is completely different from all forms of our material experience
- The conception that the living entity is formless or that the Supreme Lord is formless is also illusion
- The Mayavada conception that because the Absolute Truth is everything He must be formless is rejected here. Rather, it is confirmed that the Absolute Truth has form, and yet He is all-pervading. Nothing is independent of Him
- The Personality of Godhead is never formless. In the material world He may not be visible in His personal form to the less intelligent class of men, and therefore He may sometimes be called formless
- The Sun, from millions of years giving us light, giving us heat, but he has not lost its power. If this is possible for a dead matter, then how God will be Form-less after creating unlimited universes with His power?
- The Supreme Lord Personality of Godhead is neither impersonal nor formless, but His body is nondifferent from Him, and therefore He is known as the embodiment of eternity, knowledge and bliss
- The Supreme Personality of Godhead is not formless; He is purusam, or the enjoyer, the original person. He is the time element and is all-cognizant. He knows everything - past, present and future - as confirmed in Bhagavad-gita
- The world is not false. Factually we have to take so many things from the world for our maintenance, so how we can say that the world is false? Similarly, how can one think of the Lord as being without form?
- There is no difference between the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vasudeva, and omkara (pranava). We should be careful to understand that omkara does not indicate anything nirakara, or formless
- To the faithful the Lord reveals Himself in His form, quality and pastimes. The Lord is not formless, as wrongly conceived by the impersonalist, but His form is not like one that we have experienced