Nobody knows God, which means God is unimaginable

[dattaswami]

Meaning of ‘formless’ God

God is un-detectable

In the case of God, the word ‘formless’ indicates that He is unimaginable. Actually, the imaginable items of creation are form-full and formless. Sky is formless and Earth is formfull. In the first step, you have to climb from formfull to formless and in the second step, you have to climb from formless to unimaginable. For the people who think that God is formfull, if you say that God is unimaginable, it will be a double jump, which will be very difficult. Both formless and unimaginable are unseen. When people think God is seen like light, etc., you can say that God is the unseen, formless cosmic energy that pervades all over the cosmos. By this, you have established God at least as unseen. In the second step, you can say that God is not even the cosmic energy since it is imaginable and say that God is unimaginable.

In fact, cosmic energy also has form, which is in the form of waves or quanta and can be seen through powerful microscope. Since the microscope was not discovered in that time, God was said to be cosmic energy, which was unseen and formless.
Cosmic energy also has form of waves or quanta. It is a simile that was used when the microscope was absent. Hence, God was said to be all pervading formless entity. But today, science has developed so much that you cannot define God as unseen and formless pervading all over the cosmos. All these similes have to be dropped because every simile is detected by science and God is left over, who is beyond detection. Therefore, the time has come to say that God is un-detectable. Krishna clearly stated that nobody knows God, which means God is unimaginable (Maamtuveda na kashchana…). The words used by the human incarnations have their significance in the context of those times.

Therefore, if Mohammed said that God was formless and all pervading, you should understand that His intention was only to divert from the concept that God is some visible form and limited. Baba also tried His level best to unify all the religions of the world and was never confined to any specific religion. Baba treated all the religions of the world with equality and He has the devotees in all the religions.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace

[MMC]

Like you said.....if Mohammed said such. More than likely he took such from another. Most believe it was from Zorastrainism and Zadok. As well as the Torah from the Brews.

What of Rama?

[dattaswami]

Like you said.....if Mohammed said such. More than likely he took such from another. Most believe it was from Zorastrainism and Zadok. As well as the Torah from the Brews.

What of Rama?

The Scripture says that among the ten incarnations, Lord Krishna alone is the fullest incarnation (Paripurna Tamah Saakshat). If you compare Krishna with the other incarnations, the special point that lies with Krishna alone is the revelation of divine knowledge about God (Nivrutti) or Brahma Jnana. Buddha also gave divine knowledge. But He kept silent about God indicating that God is unimaginable. All His preaching was concentrated on the behaviour of the human being towards other co-human beings and also towards other living beings. He concentrated on the elimination of desire, which is the basis of the path to please God (Nishkama Karma Yoga). But since the concept of God is absent, the elimination of desire is taken for achieving the happiness of self itself. The followers misunderstood Buddha and took all His knowledge for Pravrutti or social service only. By this, Nivrutti disappeared in His knowledge.

Similarly, if you take Rama, He did not give any knowledge about Nivrutti. He followed the Pravrutti to preach the humanity regarding the behaviour of a human being towards other co-human beings. Ofcourse He showed faith and worship of God and thus He cannot be misunderstood as an atheist. If you take Vamana, He also did not give any reference to Nivrutti. He was concentrating on the charity towards a devotee, which is only related to Pravrutti. His mission was to suppress Bali and protect Indra. If you consider other incarnations, all were involved in the war to kill the demons and evil people. Thus, there is no trace of Nivrutti in their actions. All their actions were only to save the balance of the society, which is Pravrutti.

The inherent characteristic of Parabrahman is spiritual knowledge as referred in Veda (Prajnanam…., Satyam Jnanam….). The real knowledge is only the philosophy or spiritual knowledge, which relates to God and regarding the achievement of His grace. Except this all the other branches of knowledge are related only to the achievement of worldly pleasures, which are temporary and unreal. Therefore, the spiritual knowledge is called as Prajnanam. The letter Pra means the best. In another Vedic statement the spiritual knowledge is told to be the true knowledge (Satyam Jnanam…). This means that it deals with the ultimate absolute reality i.e., God. All the other branches deal with various levels of creation, which are relatively real with respect to God and become totally unreal if isolated from God. Therefore, based on this scriptural statement, Krishna is considered to be the fullest incarnation. Even in the field of spiritual knowledge, Krishna correlated all the levels and unified as a single ladder to attain the grace of God. Before the revelation of Gita, some were thinking about knowledge (Jnanam) and some others were thinking about devotion (Bhakti) as the real paths. Some others were thinking that rituals (Karma) happen to be the path. Krishna correlated these three levels. In the knowledge, He fixed Himself as the goal, who is the then human incarnation. This shows that the unimaginable God expressed through a convenient medium like human body for humanity is the real goal.

[MMC]

Some say Rama was the first world Saviour. Is not Rama the founder of the Katsupari Monestary in Tibet? Do you know of the Eshwar Khanewale in the city of Agam Des? What knowledge do you have or know about the first flood. Not the flood told in the Torah by the Brews.