6

According to achintya bhedabheda philosophy started by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, we the living entities are qualitatively the same with God but are different quantitatively (i.e. those same Godly qualities are in us but in less amount or in small quantities).

So what are those qualities of God or Krishna, that we also possess? Would love to hear what the Hare Krishnas or ISKCON members have to say.

Ambi
  • 2,404
  • 8
  • 29
The Crimson Universe
  • 2,600
  • 7
  • 26
  • Silence blissful love compassion - silence of mind would lead to blissful nature of Atman which in turn would make you experience of love compassion. – Agamas Tantras Aug 26 '18 at 10:45
  • But that's part of yoga philosophy, which is silencing the mind or vritti waves and experiencing bliss or true nature of Atman. I'm more interested in Achintya bheda abheda or gaudiya vaishnava philosophy. They say we possess all qualities of Krishna. They named one or two , like Krishna loves pleasures and so do we (us indulging in sensual pleasures) ... Krishna controls Prakriti and so do we (us invading other countries and so on.) Would love to hear a few more. – The Crimson Universe Aug 26 '18 at 10:57
  • So, you want to conceive of the inconceivable? – Rubellite Yakṣī Oct 14 '18 at 04:42

2 Answers2

6

According to Rupa Goswami, one of the direct disciples of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Shri Krishna exhibits a total of sixty four qualities, of which fifty of them ordinary Jivas can possess. The following are the fifty qualities by pure devotion:

  1. Beautiful bodily features which automatically attract the eyes, called rucira
  2. Auspicious characteristics
  3. Extremely pleasing
  4. Effulgent
  5. Strong
  6. Truthful
  7. Fluent
  8. Highly Learned
  9. Highly intelligent
  10. Genius
  11. Artistic
  12. Clever
  13. Expert
  14. Grateful
  15. Seer by the Authority of the Scriptures
  16. Pure
  17. Self-controlled
  18. Steadfast
  19. Forbearing
  20. Forgiving
  21. Grave
  22. Self satisfied
  23. Possessing equilibrium
  24. Magnanimous
  25. Religious
  26. Heroic
  27. Compassionate
  28. Respectful
  29. Gentle
  30. Liberal
  31. Shy
  32. Protector of surrendered souls
  33. Happy
  34. Well-wisher to His devotees
  35. Controlled by love
  36. All auspicious
  37. Most Powerful
  38. All famous
  39. Popular 40 Partiality to devotees
  40. Very attractive to all women
  41. All worshipable
  42. All opulent
  43. All honorable
  44. The supreme controller
  45. Ever youthful
  46. Wonderful linguist
  47. Pleasing talker
  48. Determined
  49. Expert judge of time and circumstances

The following are the five qualities that are partially manifested in Brahma and Self-realised Jivas, and fully manifested in Sadashiva:

  1. Changeless
  2. All cognizant
  3. Ever fresh
  4. Sat-chit-ananda
  5. Possessing all mystic perfections

The following are the five qualities present in Narayana:

  1. Inconceivable potencies
  2. Creative
  3. The original source of everything
  4. Liberator of enemies
  5. Attractor of all liberated souls

Alongside the sixty qualities mentioned above, there are four more qualities which are unique only to Krishna:

61: Performer of all wonderful activities 62: Always surrounded by loving devotees 63: Wonderful player of the flute 64. Exquisite beauty

Source: http://www.radhakunda.com/personalities/krsna_64_qualities.html

Now, that doesn't mean Krishna is limited to only sixty-four qualities in Gaudiya Vaishnavism. There are actually infinite qualities of the Lord and the qualities apart from the ones stated above, are indescribable as the Gaudiya Vaishnava definition of the term "Saguna Brahman" states (Brahman comprising of infinite auspicious/positive qualities).

  • 2
    So now 64 in spirituality has greater significance from this we can know. 64 Kalai, 64 Bairava, Nataraj Thandav 64 thirumeni - seems everything linked. From this we can understand numbers like 8, 64, 9, 12, 18, 16 have greater significance in a route to Moksha – Agamas Tantras Aug 26 '18 at 16:17
  • 1
    Thanks Surya. And what about the sat chit ananda. You've mentioned in your post that it's present in Shiva & Bruhma. Does that mean it's not present in us jeevas as per Gauda Vaishnavism? – The Crimson Universe Aug 26 '18 at 16:33
  • 2
    @TheCrimson It is said that Brahman is sat cit ananda, and we jiva souls are small particles of Lord Krishna who is Brahman as per Bhagavad gita https://www.vedabase.com/en/bg/15/7 So we are also sat-cit-ananda in our essential nature, but in very small degree. – brahma jijnasa Aug 26 '18 at 18:33
  • @brahmaJijnasa, I checked ur Gita link. There Prabhupada says, we are parts & parcels of the Lord ... If u ask me, parts always emanate from a whole, i.e. If we are parts now, then we must've been once united with God, not in his abode (that would mean we're still parts) but united WITHIN him, in his universal spirit ... But Prabhupad says, that we are eternally fragmented parts and upon liberation we don't become one with God ... Now my point is, If we are eternally separate, even after liberation, then why use words like fragments or parts? A fragment is a detached portion of a bigger whole. – The Crimson Universe Aug 26 '18 at 21:10
  • Lastly Prabhupada says, we are expansions of the Lord . . . Now his statements seems to be contradictory ... First he says, we are parts, which implies we are united WITHIN him ... But then he says, we can never unite with him or become one with God since we're eternally separate ... Then lastly he says, we're his expansions ... Now, If we're eternally separate, how can we be His expansion. – The Crimson Universe Aug 26 '18 at 21:55
  • 1
    @BrahmaJijnansa, It's common sense, that in order for something to expand, it must spring forth, from another source, i.e. if we are expansion of Him, then we actually come from WITHIN him, just like a tree expands from a seed. This implies we actually dont have eternal individuality. – The Crimson Universe Aug 26 '18 at 21:57
  • 1
    @TheCrimsonUniverse The real nature of the Self is indeed Sat-chit-ananda so I agree with BrahmaJijnasa that we're Sat-chit-ananda but minutely. As far as your other question goes...sorry, can't answer it... –  Aug 27 '18 at 05:57
  • 1
    No problem Surya ... Anyone else want to take part in this debate, and make some sense to what Prabhupada actually meant there? – The Crimson Universe Aug 27 '18 at 20:01
  • @TheCrimson Well, certainly we do have eternal individuality. See the verse I quoted, the word sanātanaḥ "eternal" clearly tells that. Here I'll try to explain, to simplify things you can be a part of Lord Krishna when you are within him as well as when you are outside of him just like you can be a part of your company when you are in the building where is your working office as well as when you are outside of the building. You are "a part" regardless of when and where you are. And you are a part eternally, meaning you never started to be a part! ... – brahma jijnasa Aug 27 '18 at 22:20
  • @TheCrimson ... Also one small tip, do not try to understand those things in some temporal sense, ie as pertaining to the time of events because that can be misleading. Thus, for eg, to talk about an expansion of the Lord, as well as "a part" thing, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the time of events, ie temporality. – brahma jijnasa Aug 27 '18 at 22:20
  • @TheCrimsonUniverse Sat-cit-ānanda is the fundamental and essential nature of jīva. Māyā blocks (or seems to block) our experience of this. Removing illusions, we experience this true nature. Svāmīnārāyaṇa said in Vachanamrut Gadhadha I.73 "After developing knowledge of the ātmán and the thorough knowledge of God's nature, one should think, 'I am the ātmán, characterized by eternal existence {sat}, consciousness {cit}, and bliss {ānanda}, whereas the body and the brahmāṇḍa are māyic and perishable. How can they compare to me?'" – Rubellite Yakṣī Oct 14 '18 at 05:30
  • More info here. – Rubellite Yakṣī Oct 14 '18 at 05:30
  • @brahmajijnasa I'm willing to be wrong, but doesn't sanātanaḥ here means infinitesimal? That is we are not just a small piece of Brahman, but an infinitesimally small part, right? – Rubellite Yakṣī Oct 14 '18 at 05:40
  • 2
    Sanatanah means eternal :) – The Crimson Universe Oct 14 '18 at 11:56
  • @SuryaKantaBoseChowdhury Any special reason why 61,62,63 and 64 have (:) while rest of them have (.).... also why you have mentioned them in one line while others in new line..? This confused me, i thought u hv mentioned only 61.. – YDS Oct 14 '18 at 18:16
  • @YDS the blockquotes are confusing it –  Oct 14 '18 at 18:28
  • 2
    @Rubellite The word sanātanaḥ doesn't mean "infinitesimal" but "eternal" as translated and explained in Bhagavad-gita 15.7 at https://www.vedabase.com/en/bg/15/7 In that verse the word aṁśaḥ means "fragmental particle", but in the Mundaka Upanishad 3.1.9 the word aṇu describes jivatma to be "atomic" or if you wish infinitesimal or extremely small as I explained at https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/22356/2790 Sanskrit dictionaries also explain sanātanaḥ to mean "eternal". – brahma jijnasa Oct 15 '18 at 13:21
  • Thank you for the explanation. I knew that sanātana means "eternal," but I wasn't sure how the final ḥ or context might modify it (since eternal, infinite, and infinite are very closely related concepts). @brahmajijnasa I would however object to the correlation between "atomic" and "infinitesmal," though. In English at least, one is very small and the other is so small as to almost be non-existent. This makes a huge difference in the field of quantum physics (see Heisenberg uncertainty). – Rubellite Yakṣī Oct 15 '18 at 13:48
  • @Rubellite When it comes to that "infinitesimal" word, yeah, you may be right about it, but we are talking here about Hinduism and specifically Vedanta and not about quantum physics. ;) – brahma jijnasa Oct 15 '18 at 14:16
  • 1
    @brahmajijnasa Of course, but I enjoy when modern science and ancient wisdom agree. So, I try to be careful about terminology – Rubellite Yakṣī Oct 15 '18 at 18:16
2

In Bhagavad-gītā 14.2 we find,

By becoming fixed in this knowledge (of discernment of the guṇas),
one can attain to the transcendental nature like My own.
Thus established, one is not born at the time of creation
or disturbed at the time of dissolution.

The quality of a living entity after liberation, which is the real nature, is explained in this verse. We attain an eternal nature like Krishna's, unaffected by creation and destruction.

In this way we attain oneness of nature with Krishna. But the oneness is only restricted to scope of having an eternal nature free from sorrow, explained later in the same chapter. There are other verses that talk about Krishna's qualities which belong only to him but never to jiva e.g. omniscience.

We find in Bhagavad-gītā 7.26

O Arjuna, as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come. I also know all living entities; but Me no one knows.

subash rajaa
  • 887
  • 5
  • 5