The Form of God navedavin manute tarh brhantam ‘One who does not know the Vedas, cannot know God.” Therefore, let us frst refer to what the Vedas have to say about lowing God vasyimatarh tasya matarh matarh yasya na veda sah avijiatam vifénatar vijAdtamavijénatam (Veda) One sho thinks that God can be understood, does not understand Him. And one who thinks that God cannot be understood, he understands. In other words, 10 one can understand God. But again, we have the Vedas emphasizing the need to know Hi, tha cedavedidatha satyamasti na cedihavedin mahati vinastih Weda) ‘One who does not realize God in this human tile, is doomed to the greatest suflering." ‘This precious human ile ‘cannot be attained even by the gods ‘The Vedas efor to vorious reasons forthe Incomprehersibiity of God. The fist reason stated is — Philosophy of Dine Love Indrivebhyah para hyartha arthebhyas ca pararin manah manasastu para buddhir buddheraima mahan parah mahatah paramavyaktamavyaktat purusah parah purusan na parasn Kimelt sa kastha sa para gatih (Wed) Beyond the senses are the sense objets, beyond. the sense objets is the mind, boyood the mind the intallet, beyond the intellect is the soul, beyond the soul is Maya and beyond Maya 15 Brahman (God.” Thus, God is totally beyond the realm of the senses. mind and intellect, which are the only means the individual possesses, Therelore, He cannot be grasped by them, The second reason &— dioyo hyamartah purusah (ede) “He, the Supreme Personality is Divine and the senses, mind and intellect are materia.” The material senses cannoi srasp a Divine. personaly. ‘The thi reason is — tameva bhantamanubhati sarvarh tasya bhdsa sarvamidarn vibhati (Veda) “He isthe luminator, and the senses, mind and intellect are tlumined by Him.” The ilumined cannot know their iuminator. Hence, He is totaly unknowable ssPhilosophy of Divine Love ‘The fourth reason = yan manasé na manute yendhur manomatam ‘tadeva brahma tvarm viddhi medavn ‘yadidamupasate (eda) tis through inspiration from God, thatthe senses, mind and intellect become capable of performing their cliferent works.” Thus the inspite senses, mind, and intellect are incapable of grasping their inspirer, God. Besides this, God is an abode of innumerable opposing predicates or quate. anoreniyan mahato mahivan ‘atma guhayarn nihito'sya jantoh tamakratuin pasyati vitasoko dhatuh prasadén-mahiménamisam (Veda) “He is smaller than the smallest thing you can think fof, and at the same time, He Is bleger than the biggest. He is smaller than the smallest in order to pervade even the smallest particle of the universe. And He is bigger than the bigest in order fo sustain everything and absorb everything within Himself at the tie of dlssluton, Now, the fact that He is the smallest can be understood, and thet He is the biggest, can aso be understood. It is even possible to ‘understand both these conditions together. But the Veda does rot stop here. It has something more to say ~ neti netyasthilamananuh Wed) 6 Philosophy of Divine Love He is nether small nor big.” Then whet is He? Again ts stated ~ “anyatra dharmadanyatradharmadanyatrasmat krtakrtat ‘anyatra bhitdcca bhavydcca yattatpasyas! tadvada, (Katha Upanisad) “He is beyond virue ond vice, as well as both cause and effect." Again — sarvendriyagundbhasarn sarvendrivavivarjitam sarvasya prabhumiéana sarvasya Saranarh suhrt (Seetaéeatara. Upanigad) He is dovold of the sense organs, but He grasps all the objects of the senses.” ‘apanipado javano grahita pasyatyacaksuh sa érnotvakarnah ‘sa vetti vedyarn na ca tasyasti vetta ‘tamahuragryamh purusam mahantam (Soetagentara. Upanigad) "He has no feet, yet He runs. He has no hands, yet He hoki. He has no eves, yet He sees. He has no ears yet He hears, He mows al that Is to be known, but no fone knows “Him” Now listen to a totally contradictory definitionPhilosophy of Divine Love Sahasrasirsa purusah sahasraksah sahasrapat sa bhumim sareatasprivatyatisthad dasangulam (Svetasvatara Upanigad) “He has Innumerable heads, trinumerable aes Insimerable legs, ete" If He did not have les, we would presume Him to be lame. But it soid that He nuns, 30 hhow can we possibly conslder Him to be late? The same 55 the case with the other sense organs tadejatl tannaijati taddure tadvantike tadantarasya sarvasya tadu sarvasyasya bahyatah (ede) ‘He walks, at the same time He. does not walk. He is further than the furthest, and at the same time, nearer than the nearest. He is both within all and outside a." Next the Veda. states — ‘ajayamano bahudha vi tasya_yoniti paripasyanti dhirah (eda) He is unbor but He takes innumerable births” Again — tapo'tapyata. sa tapas taptod idarh'sarvam asrjata yadidarh Kimea. tat srsted tadevanupravisat, tadanupraviéya acca tyaccabhavat. niruktarh céniruktarh ca. nilayarh 4 nilayarh ca, vijnanam 4 vijfanarh ca, satyath canrtarh ca. satyamabhavat yadidarh kishca, tat satyamitydcaksate. tadapyesa loko bhavati, (Taitriva. Upanisad) Philosophy of Divine Love “He desired and performed penance which rested in creation.” ‘Thus He is the maker of the marvelous universe, But again is stated — anantascatma vigvaripo hyakarta trayarn yada vindate brahmametat He is a nondoer. He does nothing.” It is in this connection that the Gi states — mattah parateram nanyat kimeidast! dhanaijava ‘may! sarvamidash protam siitre manigand iva ‘maya tatamidamn sarvarh jagadavyaktamartina gatir bharta prabhuh saksi nloasah Saranari suhrt prabhavah pralayah sthanarh nidhanath bijamavyayam hath sarvasya prabhavo mattah saream pravartate param brahma param dhama, ‘pavitram paramam bhavan Purusari Sasvatam dioyamadidevamajarh vibhum ‘athavd bahunaitena kit jadtena tavarjuna vistabhyahamidarh krésnamekaméenasthito Jagat (Gia) The Bhigavatam too dadares the same — dravyam karma ca kélaé ca svabhavo jiva eva ca vasudevat paro brahman na canyortho’ sti tatteatahPhilosophy of Divine Love ‘sarvarh puruga evedarh bhiitarh bhavyarh bhavacea vat tenedamavrtarh visvam vltastimadhitisthatt padesu sarvabhitani purhsah sthitipado viduh ‘amrtain ksemamabhayarh trimurdhno'dhayi mardhasu (Bhagavatam) ‘One of the definitions given by Veda Wvlsa is truly ‘extraordinary — vatra yena yato vasya, yasmal yad yad yatha yada syddidamh bhagavan saksat pradhanapurusesvarah. (Bhagavatarn) He who. the workSor, He in whom the creation rests, He by whom and from who it hes come into existence, Hee who forms lis agent apd its actiiy, He who constitutes the time factor in which i subsets, He te the Lord of all souls ‘The Rimiyana foo states the same, and so dows the Veda — ima svardpa tumhara vacana agocara buddhi para, ‘avigata akatha apara neti neti nita nigama vada, Jaga pekhana tuma dekhana hare, vidhi hari ambhu nacdvanahare teu na Janahim marama tumhara, ‘aur tumahimn ko jananahara. rama atarkya buddhi mana bar mata hamara asa sunahu sayani, (Ramayana) Philosophy of Dine Love ‘adrstamavyavaharyam (eda) Al these quotations Imply that God is totaly imper- ceptible, unapproschable, unthinkable, and incomprehensible Veda Visa goes to the extent of saving that even Brahma, ‘Sia etc, donot know Him naharh_na yayarm yadriam gatim vidur na vamadevah kimutapare surah tanmayaya mohitabuddhayastuidarn vinirmitam catmasamar vicakymahe (Bragavetam) The Vedas refer to God as possessing three forms or aspects — bhokta bhogvam preritararm ca mated ‘sarear proktarn trividhamh brahmametat (Svetasvotara Upanigad) Liberation ffom May’ can only be attained through knowledge of three kinds of Brahman. Fst s the enlove second the enjoyable and third the inspirer. Brahman as the inspirer has already been refered to. Relering to the enjoyer ‘aspect of Brahman, the Upanigod declares — tmanarh" rathinarh elddht Sarirarh'rathameva ty buddhisn tu sarathim viddhi manah pragrahameva ¢ indriyani hayanahur vlsayarn'stesu gocaran tmendrivamanoyuktar bhoktetyahur manisinahPhilosophy of Divine Love viji@nasdrathiryastu manah pragrehavannarah 50° dhvanah paramapnoti tadvisnoh paramarn padarh (Katha. Uparisad) "The soul is the master of the chariot, the body the chariot, the intellect is the chavioteer, the mind is the rein and the senses are the horses” Such an entity endowed with 1 soul, mind, intellect and senses is referred to as the enjover fr the individual soul. Relering to the enjosable aspect of Brahman, the Vedes declare — ajamekarn lohitaéuklakrsnarh bavi prajah srjamanarh sarapah ‘ajo hyeko jusamano'nusete Jahatyenam bhuktabhogamajo'nyah (Svetdsvatara Upanisgad) ‘This ently fs also etemal. It never had a. beginning. and wil have no end. This third enity ie refered to as Mava Its tricolowred owing to its constituent gunas or modes satva, rojas and taras. Each of these three entities i. (I) God — inspier Brahman (2) Soul— enjover Brahman (G) Maya — enjoyable Brahman, are beyond the comprehension ‘of the intact. Now, If God Is beyond the comprehension of the intellect, how can we possbly hope to know Him? It we do no know Him, there val be no falth, and without faith, we cannot attain Him. And if we do not attain Him, ‘ur supreme goal of attaining eternal biss wil not be attained. The Vedas dedare — tasya_yonith paripasyanti dhirah vedahametash purusarh mahantam Adityavarnarn tamasah parestat (Wed) Philosophy of Dine Love Thete have been those who have known God. Now, ts it pot puzding? On the one hand the scriptures dedare God to be totally unknowable and imperceptible, and on the ther, state that He is knowable and perceptible. How will this controversy be clarified? We shall reflect upon this subject