Incongruity

Expressions researched:
"incongruities" |"incongruity" |"incongruous"

SB Canto 1

SB 1.6.18, Translation and Purport:

The transcendental form of the Lord, as it is, satisfies the mind's desire and at once erases all mental incongruities. Upon losing that form, I suddenly got up, being perturbed, as is usual when one loses that which is desirable.

That the Lord is not formless is experienced by Nārada Muni. But His form is completely different from all forms of our material experience. For the whole duration of our life we go on seeing different forms in the material world, but none of them is just apt to satisfy the mind, nor can any one of them vanish all perturbance of the mind. These are the special features of the transcendental form of the Lord, and one who has once seen that form is not satisfied with anything else; no form in the material world can any longer satisfy the seer. That the Lord is formless or impersonal means that He has nothing like a material form and is not like any material personality.

SB 1.17.20, Purport:

At the same time He is the compiler of the Vedānta. No one is independent of Him, and everyone is engaged in His service in different ways. In the conditioned state, such services are rendered by the living being under force of the material nature, whereas in the liberated state the living being is helped by the spiritual nature in the voluntary loving service of the Lord. There is no incongruity or inebriety in His actions. All are on the path of Absolute Truth. Bhīṣmadeva correctly estimated the inconceivable actions of the Lord. The conclusion is, therefore, that the sufferings of the representative of religion and the representative of the earth, as present before Mahārāja Parīkṣit, were planned to prove that Mahārāja Parīkṣit was the ideal executive head because he knew well how to give protection to the cows (the earth) and the brāhmaṇas (religious principles), the two pillars of spiritual advancement. Everyone is under the full control of the Lord.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.1.30, Purport:

To common sense the description in this verse appears to be somewhat contradictory because sometimes the sun has been described as the eyeball and sometimes as the outer space sphere. But there is no room for common sense in the injunctions of the śāstras. We must accept the description of the śāstras and concentrate more on the form of the virāṭ-rūpa than on common sense. Common sense is always imperfect, whereas the description in the śāstras is always perfect and complete. If there is any incongruity, it is due to our imperfection and not the śāstras'. That is the method of approaching Vedic wisdom.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.25.10, Purport:

Lord says, "I am sitting in everyone's heart, and from Me come everyone's remembrance and forgetfulness." Devahūti has stated that false identification of the body with the self and attachment for possessions in relation to the body are also under the direction of the Lord. Does this mean that the Lord discriminates by engaging one in His devotional service and another in sense gratification? If that were true, it would be an incongruity on the part of the Supreme Lord, but that is not the actual fact. As soon as the living entity forgets his real, constitutional position of eternal servitorship to the Lord and wants instead to enjoy himself by sense gratification, he is captured by māyā. This capture by māyā is the consciousness of false identification with the body and attachment for the possessions of the body. These are the activities of māyā, and since māyā is also an agent of the Lord, it is indirectly the action of the Lord. The Lord is merciful; if anyone wants to forget Him and enjoy this material world, He gives him full facility, not directly but through the agency of His material potency.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

The acceptance of more than one God is contradictory to the conclusion that Lord Vāsudeva, the absolute Personality of Godhead, is one without a second. Even if we agree to accept that the quadruple forms of Godhead are all identical, we cannot avoid the incongruous flaw of noneternity. Unless we accept that there are some differences among the personalities, there is no meaning to the idea that Saṅkarṣaṇa is an expansion of Vāsudeva, Pradyumna is an expansion of Saṅkarṣaṇa, and Aniruddha is an expansion of Pradyumna. There must be a distinction between cause and effect. For example, a pot is distinct from the earth from which it is made, and therefore we can ascertain that the earth is the cause and the pot is the effect. Without such distinctions, there is no meaning to cause and effect. Furthermore, the followers of the Pañcarātric principles do not accept any differences in knowledge and qualities between Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

To refute such an argument, the aphorism svarūpa-dvayam īkṣyate declares that in spite of appearances, there is no chance of duality in the Absolute, for He is but one in diverse manifestations. Understanding that the Absolute displays varied pastimes by the influence of His energies at once removes the apparent incongruity of His inconceivably opposite energies. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.4.16) gives the following description of the inconceivable potency of the Lord:

karmāṇy anīhasya bhavo ’bhavasya te

durgāśrayo ’thāri-bhayāt palāyanam

kālātmano yat pramadā-yutāśrayaḥ

svātman-rateḥ khidyati dhīr vidām iha

“Although the Supreme Personality of Godhead has nothing to do, He nevertheless acts; although He is always unborn, He nevertheless takes birth; although He is time, fearful to everyone, He flees Mathurā in fear of His enemy to take shelter in a fort; and although He is self-sufficient, He marries 16,000 women.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Hayagrīva: He felt that the father God is an infantile wish. He says, "The whole thing is so patently infantile, so incongruous with reality, that one whose attitudes..."

Prabhupāda: So what is his reality? Infantile conception of God, but what he is, except the child? Huh? He is also planning something. That is also childish. So how he becomes more than a child? He cannot give us any definite program by which everyone will be hopeful.

Hayagrīva: Well, he felt psychoanalysis was the answer.

Prabhupāda: That is jugglery of word. Psychoanalysis, nobody will, can understand, a common man. Psychoanalysis, if there is meaning, that there is supreme controller, that is psychoanalysis. We see everywhere controller, so it is natural. This is psychoanalysis, that there is a supreme controller. That is natural. Why defying this fact?

1970 Correspondence

Letter to Syamasundara -- Los Angeles 25 February, 1970:

The transcendental vibration OM is also authorized, but is specifically sung by the impersonalists. Although there is no incongruity, still because we are preaching the personal feature of God, we shall not chant Hari Om.

Regarding the castle which George has acquired, certainly it can be turned to a nice Krsna Consciousness asrama, and you can help him your best in the same pattern as you have developed our 7 Bury Place. But I do not know whether George will like to install Radha Krsna Murtis in that asrama. In case he likes to do so, then you and your wife, Malati, will have to take care of the Deities as nicely as possible. I do not know in which way George wants to conduct this asrama, and on hearing from you further on this subject, I can give you nice plans. Our general plan is always the same—chanting, dancing and distributing Prasadam. This program can be reduced or enhanced according to one's financial equipment.