The Eternal Form Of Bliss And Knowledge

One can have knowledge of the Lord only if it is made known by the Lord Himself. This is repeatedly stated in Bhagavad-gita, specifically in the four verses known as the summary verses of Bhagavad-gita (Bg. 10.8-11). Independently, even the greatest mundane thinker cannot understand the Absolute Truth by mental speculation. At most, he can achieve realization of Krsna's impersonal (Brahman) aspect, but what the Gita calls the most confidential knowledge of the Personality of Godhead can be comprehended by a very few, who receive that knowledge from the Lord in the heart because of their devotional service. The immediate example is Arjuna, whom Lord Krsna declared in the Fourth Chapter to be qualified alone out of thousands because rather than being a big scholar, meditator or yogi, he was a real friend and sincere devotee of the Lord. Therefore Krsna revealed transcendental knowledge to him, just as a father might disclose confidences only to his pet son.

The followers of impersonal philosophy stress that the Absolute Truth is ultimately impersonal or void and state that although the Absolute may manifest many forms in this world, they are all material. Citing the Upanisads, which are elementary texts of the Vedas, they conclude from statements such as "the Lord does not have any material form" that He has no form at all. But how can they explain this statement, which is found in the Īsopanisad (Mantra 16): "Please remove the effulgence of Your transcendental rays so that I may see Your form of bliss"?

A form of bliss is not within our experience, since everyone in the material world is without exception prone to four miseries: birth, disease, old age and death. But the Vedas point beyond our limited experience to sac-cid-ananda-vigraha, the form of eternal bliss and knowledge. From this one can understand how impersonalism is similar to materialism and atheism because these philosophies are all based only on what one can experience through the bodily senses or mental speculation. But bhagavata-dharma (Krsna consciousness) is based on the authority of the Vedic scriptures, in which a personalist has complete faith.

The Brahma-samhita states that the Lord can use any one of His transcendental senses for various purposes. He can eat with His eyes, or He can see with His legs. Obviously this power is beyond the limits of a mundane form. Standing as a direct challenge to impersonalism, Srimad-Bhagavatam presents a most elaborate description of the Lord's various transcendental forms, which are all identical yet different in appearance. Some of His bodies are black, some red, some yellow and some white; some are two-handed, and some are four-handed; some are like a fish and some like a lion. The Bhagavatam relates all the activities or pastimes of these forms in detail, especially in the Tenth Canto (published now as the Krsna Books).

It is no wonder that impersonalists have avoided trying to apply their tainted and speculative interpretations to the Bhagavatam, for no verbal jugglery can hide the crystal-clear meaning of Srimad-Bhagavatam's verses. Even the father of impersonalism, Sripada Sahkaracarya, although having written a famous commentary on Vedanta-sūtra, would not touch Srimad-Bhagavatam, which is a further elaboration of the Vedanta-sūtra by its original author, Srila Vyasadeva.