Form or Formless

[Guest guest]

There is a debate- should we worship God with Form, or without Form?

 

Without Form- makes a person cold and unfeeling. But rarely a fanatic.

Methods like Raja Yoga and Gyan Yoga mean a person can take care of

his own spiritual progress without the need of a Loving Deity(after

all, Buddhists do this).

 

 

With form- Makes person humane and loving, but also a

fanatic(usually). Followers of 1 form attack other forms. So Vaishnavs

say Vishnu is supreme, Shaktas say Shakti. They both quote Puranas to

prove their point. Sciptures like Upanishads that disagree with this

view point are sidelined or ignored.

On the other hand, it is easier to worship a Deity with form, although

most people do only worship, not true Love, which negates any

advantage they have.

 

So what is better- with or without form?

[Guest guest]

Depends completely on the persons nature.it is my view that very few people are realy capable of formless worship. It is very difficult to get rid of the "What am i worshiping feeling" However a highly philosophical person may find it beneficial /natural way to worship .Falling in love with an idea(God) is possible . The real question is how much do we know of the idea(God ...in this case) that we can fall in love with it.

It is much easier to worship god with form when we can see and relate to the forms attributes also to fall in love with the said form of god.For the vast majority this is the

way to go.A bit of fanaticism may come in a beginner but a diligent bhakta is never a fanatic.A true bhakta is a epitome of grace,kindness and humility there is really no place for fanaticism in a bhaktas heart.

Fanaticism is a product of avidya , a guru can guide is bhakta disciple clear of this threat.

[Guest guest]

, radha_sharma_99 <no_reply wrote:

>

> There is a debate- should we worship God with Form, or without Form?

 

Very important and the most debateable question is this.

 

Shri Krishna has confirmed in Gita that those who worship

Nirguna and formless god, their path is very difficult almost

impossible.

 

In my view, worshipping the formless for the beginner is a real

Faux-pas. A beginner should always start from duality, as to begin

with we need a source outside us to worship. And this duality

worship brings fast results

 

Those worshipping the formless...dont get any help from any Devas

or from Mother Nature. Rather Nature opposes them. Instead of

getting some results they get confused and finally leave it in

between.

 

One who has reached the heights of duality, and have merged into

his deity/god, will automatically be made to worship the formless

afterwards

 

Paramhansa's example is worth noting here...after reaching the

heights of Mother Kali's worship, he was finally taken to Nirvikalpa

samadhi to merge into the formless.

 

Buddha also did not reach the formless. Between Ishwara and

Turiya...there is a big void.. and it is this void where Buddha

reached and preached that the ultimate God is Sunya (zero)...which is

true but Incomplete description of God.

 

with Love

 

baba

[Guest guest]

With form is better. Buddhists dont believe in God, but then they have

very complicated death rituals to ensure that they ar born in the

right womb the next time. They are scared that if they die without

reaching Nirvana, they might be born in an animal birth, or in a non

spiritual family, and hence they try to choose their own next birth.

This requires great Yogic power- and few can do it.

 

The Hindu way is better, and even Jhandu Lal from Bihar can do it. As

long as you have a Isht Devtaa, you have nothing to fear. You can die

a 1000 times, but your Ishta Devtaa will never forget you. He/She will

always bring you back to the Path, even if you stumble a little. Death

becomes something no longer to be feared, just a hiccup in the Path to

enlightenment.

 

Your Deity can also guide you through the Karmic minefield-its hard

for us to see what the best choice for us is, while the deity, who can

see our past and possible future, can guide us better.

 

Another very important reason, not well understood, are Demonic

forces. Demons are degenerate beings who want to push us down, and

enjoy sense pleasures. They are very powerful- in the stories, the

Devtaas(or the Good, kind forces) always lose. This battle also takes

place inside us, where our negativity fights the positive forces of

meditation. In the stories, the Devtaas always have to go to some

Higher Deity like Shiv, Vishnu or Durga to rescue them. Similarly, if

we only rely only on our own Yogic force, we will always lose. We need

the help of Very Powerful Deities to fight for us our inner Demons.

[Guest guest]

In theory, Buddhists dont believe in God. In practice, they found out

that their are powerful higher forces without whose help they cannot

make progress.

 

So many Buddhists worship Tara, who is more like Hindus Mahalakshmi.

Tibetis also worship Devis like Dakinis, Rakinis(these are Tantric

Godesses, associated with Chakras) to guide them.

 

Also, many Buddhists have statues of Buddha in their temple.

 

In Japan, they worship the Amitabh Buddha, a very kind God like our

Krishna/Vishnu. Japanese Buddism is more like Bhakti Yoga rather than

anything Buddha taught.

 

So even for Buddhists, worship with form is required. You can say any

amount of theory about the greatness of the Nirguna Brahma, but

ultimately in practice you need a Form to worship.

[Guest guest]

> Those worshipping the formless...dont get any help from any Devas

> or from Mother Nature. Rather Nature opposes them. Instead of

> getting some results they get confused and finally leave it in

> between.

 

Babaji, why does Nature opppose those who worship Formless God? After

all, as long as a person is making Sprititual progress, there should

be no harm, right?

[Guest guest]

, lalu_yadav_bhai <no_reply wrote:

>

> Babaji, why does Nature opppose those who worship Formless God?

After

> all, as long as a person is making Sprititual progress, there should

> be no harm, right?

>

 

good question ! When we worship the formless god without

attributes we actually ignore his force (shakti)...which is

responsible for running the universe.

 

Nature opposes any idea in which she is not taken into

consideration. Her dark forces of Tam do not want any change for the

betterment. So any sadhaka going for Nirguna Brahm, is attacked

fiercely by the dark forces. Good energies do not come forward to

help, because they are not given any consideration by sadhaka

 

That z why, rishis advised to do Bhakti first and make your

deity happy, so that his energies come to your rescue.

 

Tantra understood this mystery and Although tantrik's final

aim is Turiya Brahm (formless, guna-less), they start from Mother

Shakti and with her help they reach the final destination.

 

That z why you will find very rare examples of sadhaka of

Nirguna Brahm.. (only 2 i know Janak and Ramana Maharishi).

 

In Kaliyuga, when the power/shakti is really playing her

game, it is almost impossible to reach Nirguna Brahm. I have seen

many chanting... This is Maya, or Aham Brahm Asmi, or Tat Twam

Asi...finally reaching no where, just getting their ego inflated.

 

My personal experience is that Bhakti, with gyan...not fanatic

bhakti, is the easiest way to God in Kaliyuga.

 

When we reach him, let him decide if we are capable of reaching

Nirguna or not.

 

with love

 

baba

[Guest guest]

> My personal experience is that Bhakti, with gyan...not fanatic

> bhakti, is the easiest way to God in Kaliyuga.

 

Babaji, there is a question. Normally, Gyan Yoga is considered a

logical path, where you dont need help of any deity. Bhakti is an

emotional path where surrender to deity is most important.

 

Usually, Yogis of either field follow exclusively their own path,

deriding the other. So Bhaktas say there is no need for Gyan, as Love

of God is enough, while Gyanis say Love is unnecssary, one should

concentrate on the Self.

 

So how can we combine these seemingly opposite paths? In the Gita,

Krishna says we have to follow the Triple Path of Gyan-Bhakti-Karma,

but most Gurus since then have taken one and focussed exclusively on that.

[Guest guest]

, shanracer <no_reply wrote:

 

Bhakti without gyan leads to fanaticism

 

Gyan without Bhakti leads to inflation of Ego and misconceptions.

 

When Bhakti is done in true sense, Gyan automatically follows.

Mira Bai, Hanuman, Narada, Paramhansa..were all true bhaktas and

they are gyanis also.

 

How can god leave his true bhaktas into ignorance without Gyan?

 

Gyan also does not mean, pure-logical, dry, emotion-less Knowledge.

Gyan also does not mean worship of the God without form or guna.

Gyan in its true sense is enquiry about God, his ways and his

mysteries. Vivekananda was a Gyani, Yogananda was a Gyani and Shri

Aurobindo was a Gyani...and all of them had a touch of Bhakti/divine

love in them.

 

And when a Gyani, comes to know about God, his will as Adi Shakti,

his manifestation as Universe...when he understands the Greatness of

God, he automatically starts loving him....that is true Gyan

 

Bhakti leads to Gyan...and Gyan leads to Bhakti, and when both are

in equilibrium...they lead to Divine Love...which is the last step

of the ladder to enlightenment.

 

with Love

 

Baba

[Guest guest]

Namaste all. Thanks dear Babaji for your kind comments.

 

I would like to share these messages posted earlier on

my delphi forum about the two aspects of the Lord.

 

Please s to read the messages.

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=9.1

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=9.4

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/jayaradhey/messages?msg=9.6

 

Jaya Sri Radhey!

 

Dr. Jaya

Barsana, U.P. India

 

 

, radha_sharma_99 <no_reply

wrote:

>

> There is a debate- should we worship God with Form, or without

Form?

>

> Without Form- makes a person cold and unfeeling. But rarely a

fanatic.

> Methods like Raja Yoga and Gyan Yoga mean a person can take care of

> his own spiritual progress without the need of a Loving Deity(after

> all, Buddhists do this).

>

>

> With form- Makes person humane and loving, but also a

> fanatic(usually). Followers of 1 form attack other forms. So

Vaishnavs

> say Vishnu is supreme, Shaktas say Shakti. They both quote Puranas

to

> prove their point. Sciptures like Upanishads that disagree with

this

> view point are sidelined or ignored.

> On the other hand, it is easier to worship a Deity with form,

although

> most people do only worship, not true Love, which negates any

> advantage they have.

>

> So what is better- with or without form?

>