Why and how The Ishwar is shapeless / formless ? Answer only if having vedic references
According to Advaita Vedanta and Vedas, there is just 1 God represented by sound OM and he is OMnipresent, OMnipotent and OMniscient, Singular, Invisible, Infinite, Nameless, Formless and All pervading and Father/Brahman of all. Sanskrit Brahman (an n-stem, nominative bráhmā) from a root bṛh- "to swell, expand, grow, enlarge". Modern science also says that universe is constantly expanding after the Big Bang
- "Ekam evadvitiyam" "He is One only without a second." [Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1]
- "Na casya kascij janita na cadhipah." "Of Him there are neither parents nor lord." [Svetasvatara Upanishad 6:9]
- "Na tasya pratima asti" "There is no image of Him." [Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:19]
- Na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam." "His form cant be seen; no one can see Him with the body’s eyes." [Svetasvatara Upanishad 4:20]
- "shudhama poapvidham" "He is bodyless and pure." [Yajurveda 40:8]
Yama's explanation to Nachiketa is a succinct explication of Hindu metaphysics, and focuses on the following points from
- The sound Om! is the syllabus of the supreme Brahman
- The Atma(Cosmic Consciousness), whose symbol is Om is the same as the omnipresent Brahman. Smaller than the smallest and larger than the largest, the Soul is formless and all-pervading and cant be seen with human eyes.
An individual soul covered by ego/Ahamkaar is like a drop of consciousness separated from Ocean of Omniscient Cosmic Consciousness(in which infinite space exists).
Higher than the senses, stand the objects of senses. Higher than objects of senses, stands mind. Higher than mind, stands intellect. Higher than intellect, stands the great self. Higher than the great self, stands Avyaktam. Higher than Avyaktam, stands Purusha. Higher than this, there is nothing. He is the final goal and the highest point. In all beings, dwells this Purusha, as Atman (soul), invisible, concealed. He is only seen by the keenest thought, by the sublest of those thinkers who see into the subtle. —Katha Upanishad 3.10-1
In the beginning this was Self alone, in the shape of a person (Purusha). He looking around saw nothing but his Self Atman . He first said, "This is I/Aham/Om", therefore he became I/Om by name. —Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.1
Purusha himself is Paramatma, hence “Na Tasya Pratima Asti”, for Purusha has no image, he is infinite pure bliss of Ocean. People call him with various names like Shiva, Krishna, Rama, Allah, Father etc., But truth is, he is nameless and your very own real self “I”
Buddha is the only prophet who said, I do not care to know your various theories about God. What is the use of discussing all the subtle doctrines about the soul? Do good and be good.
The Self when it appears behind the universe is called God. The same Self when it appears behind this little universe—the body—is the soul.
Most of the people are slaves of senses and temporary pleasures of senses and cant understand, that seer/Kshetrgya within themselves, their real “I” itself is Purusha/God.
Splendid and without a bodily form is this Purusha, without and within, unborn, without life breath and without mind, higher than the supreme element. From him are born life breath and mind. He is the soul of all beings. — Munduka Upanishad,
Ram, Krishna and other deities were in past and are seen by Bhakts, because they identify themselves with their inferior self i.e. mind & body, but an Advaita Gyani lives in present in his very soul i.e. Atman, the real “I”.
Hence, Ramana Maharshi,a great Advaita saint, stressed on self-enquiry through "Who is I?"
"The form of that person is like a cloth dyed with turmeric, or like grey sheep's wool, or like the scarlet insect called Indragopa, or like a tongue of fire, or like a white lotus, or like a flash of lightning. He who knows this—his splendour is like a flash of lightning. Now, therefore, the description of Brahman: "Not this, not this" (Neti, Neti); for there is no other and more appropriate description than this "Not this." Now the designation of Brahman: "The Truth of truth." The vital breath is truth and It (Brahman) is the Truth of that." Brhidaranayaka Upanishad: 2.3.6, Yagnyavalkya
Not inwardly cognitive, nor outwardly cognitive, not both-wise cognitive, not a cognition-mass, not cognitive, not non-cognitive, unseen, with which there can be no dealing, ungraspable, having no distinctive mark, non-thinkable, that cannot be designated, the essence of assurance, of which is the state of being one with the Self the cessation of development, tranquil, benign, without a second, such they think is the fourth. He is the Self (Atman). He should be discerned.” — Mandukya Upanishad 7,
"In ancient times in the early morning of creation, in the beginning, the effulgent consciousness bestowed his rays to look within( in the head), from beyond, which kindled the waking state by uniting(with the brain)" Sama veda, Agneya Kanda, chapter 1, verse 20 "The mighty consciousness as a relative of the great Activity( Vaisvanara) draws out the assumed form( of Savita) for existence among men whom the sense activities guide.” Sama veda 188.8.131.52
The following is from Nasadaya Sukta with implied formlessness of Brahman.
Then even nothingness was not, nor existence, There was no air then, nor the heavens beyond it. What covered it? Where was it? In whose keeping? Was there then cosmic water, in depths unfathomed?
Then there was neither death nor immortality nor was there then the torch of night and day. The One breathed windlessly and self-sustaining. There was that One then, and there was no other.
At first there was only darkness wrapped in darkness. All this was only unillumined cosmic water. That One which came to be, enclosed in nothing, arose at last, born of the power of heat.
In the beginning desire descended on it - that was the primal seed, born of the mind. The sages who have searched their hearts with wisdom know that which is kin to that which is not.
And they have stretched their cord across the void, and know what was above, and what below. Seminal powers made fertile mighty forces. Below was strength, and over it was impulse.
But, after all, who knows, and who can say Whence it all came, and how creation happened? the devas (gods) themselves are later than creation, so who knows truly whence it has arisen?
Whence all creation had its origin, the creator, whether she/he fashioned it or whether she/he did not, the creator, who surveys it all from highest heaven, she/he knows - or maybe even she/he does not know. - Nasadaya Sukta
However Narayana is supposed to be both Formless and with form Non-Vedic however. Sakalam Nishkalam Shuddham, Nirgunam Guna Shashwatham In Vishnu Shatamana stotram, by Narada.
In a way, I agree with Narada. Not formless and Not with form. Neti,Neti