Category:God and the Impersonalists
Pages in category "God and the Impersonalists"
The following 38 pages are in this category, out of 38 total.
A
- Although the impersonal feature of the Absolute is an expansion of the rays of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He does not need to take care of the impersonalists who enter the brahmajyoti
- As the impersonalist jnanis or the demons killed by the Lord attain Brahmaloka, or Satyaloka, persons killed by a devotee of the Lord also attain Satyaloka
B
- Bhakti means sravanam kirtanam visnoh, chanting and hearing about Lord Visnu. Impersonalists cannot be purified, for they do not offer personal prayers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead
- Bhismadeva is one of the twelve mahajanas who know the principles of transcendental knowledge. His confirmation of Lord Sri Krsna's being the original Personality of Godhead is also corroborated by the impersonalist Sankara
- By such surrender, an impersonalist can be elevated to the Vaikuntha-loka (spiritual planet) where, as a surrendered soul, he attains bodily features like the Lord
E
- Even the impersonalist's object of destination is Krsna as the impersonal jyoti, and the yogi's destination of Paramatma is also Krsna
- Even the Mayavadi impersonalists who flatter themselves and believe that they have become the Lord themselves are not abhijnah or svarat, fully cognizant or fully independent. The Mayavadi monists undergo a severe process of austerity and penance
I
- If God also has a material body, then the impersonalistic theory that the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the living entities are one and the same can be very easily propagated
- Impersonalists accept one aspect of the Lord's features, the all-pervasive aspect, but they cannot understand His localized situation in His transcendental abode, where He always engages in fully transcendental pastimes
- Impersonalists and the enemies of the Lord are, because of attraction to God, allowed to enter into His kingdom, but they are not allowed to enter into the Vaikuntha planets or the Goloka Vrndavana planet of the Supreme Lord
- Impersonalists generally pose themselves as incarnations of God to foolish persons who have no knowledge of Vedic wisdom. If such foolish men have any knowledge at all, it is more dangerous in their hands than ignorance itself
- Impersonalists, who desire to become one with the Supreme, are unable to evaluate the devotees of the Lord. Thus from time immemorial these two transcendental pilgrims have sometimes been competitors
T
- The atheists directly say there is no God, and the Impersonalists say there may be God, but He has no form. It is indirectly saying that there is no God
- The conception of oneness, as overly stressed by the impersonalist, is also accepted by the personalist devotee of the Lord
- The devotee of the Lord worships the transcendental form of the Lord, whereas the impersonalist meditates upon the glaring effulgence, or the bodily rays of the Lord, known as the brahma-jyotir
- The impersonalist cannot enter into the supernatural roles played by the devotee of the Lord
- The impersonalist must know from this verse that the Lord is not impersonal, for He has His genitals, on which all the pleasurable objects of sex depend
- The impersonalist philosophers are in one sense like the enemies of the Lord because the out-and-out enemies of the Lord and the impersonalists are both allowed to enter only into the impersonal effulgence of the brahma-jyoti
- The impersonalist undergoes a series of difficult programs on account of his impersonal meditation. But the devotee, due to the Lord's personal service, progresses very easily
- The impersonalist who feels transcendental pleasure in striving to become one with the Lord is defeated when he sees the beautiful transcendental features of the Lord
- The impersonalists desire salvation from Him (Krsna), and He always awards them according to their aspiration, but here Bhismadeva aspires to see the Lord in His personal feature. All pure devotees aspire for this
- The impersonalists do not have the power to go beyond the effulgence of God and arrive at the Personality of Godhead, from whom this effulgence is emanating
- The impersonalists say that God cannot be seen. God can be seen by the light of God and not by man-made speculations. Here this light is specifically mentioned as vidyat, which is an order by the Lord to Brahma
- The impersonalists speculate on the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His devotees and subject them to the tests of direct perception. However, the Lord, His devotee and His devotional service are not subject to direct perception
- The impersonalists think of the Absolute Personality of Godhead in two different ways, as above mentioned
- The impersonalists' false arguments claiming the formlessness of the Supreme Truth do not appeal to a devotee of the Lord, even though such a devotee may not be very advanced in devotional service
- The impersonalists, yogis and enemies of the Lord enter into the Lord’s transcendental effulgence
- The Lord is so kind that He gives shelter to everyone - both impersonalists and devotees
- The most dangerous theory of the impersonalists is that when God comes as an incarnation He accepts a material body created by the three modes of material nature. This Mayavada theory has been condemned by Lord Caitanya as most offensive
- The pleasure feature of the Lord is understood by the pure devotees only, and not by others. The impersonalist is satisfied simply by understanding the all-pervasive influence of the Lord. This is called Brahman realization
- There are innumerable planets in the material world and innumerable planets in the spiritual world as well. On each planet there are innumerable inhabitants who worship the Lord, for the Lord is worshipable by all but the impersonalists
- They (impersonalists) worship the Lord in His visva-rupa, or all-pervading universal form, and on the other they think of the Lord's unmanifested, indescribable, subtle form
- 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