Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Akshat Namdeo's avatar

Hare Krishna prabhuji, PAMHO. I had a question different from today's essay.

While I just began reading Bhagavad Gita, one claim of Srila Prabhupada was confusing to me. In the Introduction of BG, he says "atleast theoretically accept Krishna as SPOG". The thing confusing about this is, there is no formal proof given, this is just a proposition, which is satisfied in the verses ahead in which Krishna says he is the SPOG. Isn't this kind of a circular logic? There is no formal proof given, just a claim and a verse confirming the claim.

I come from a devotee family, so it's easy for me to accept, but when I shared this with my friends, they said that "why should I even assume this proposition? Before this proposition, there must be a formal proof given that God must exist, then God is not some light, and then Krishna is God. How can you make claims just off a book?" I was actually very bewildered at that time, so can you please tell me how to approach KC in a formal way, which will make everything logical, in a more formal way, beginning from proof of God's existence to this SPOG claim to a formal proof?

3 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?