• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

The Concept of God in Hinduism by Swami Krishnananda

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Concept of God in Hinduism by Swami Krishnananda

The earliest statement of the Nature of Reality occurs in the first book of the Rig-Veda: Ekam Sat-Viprah Bahudha Vadanti. "The ONE BEING, the wise diversely speak of."


The tenth book of the Rig-Veda regards the highest conception of God both as the Impersonal and the Personal: The Nasadiya Sukta states that the Supreme Being is both the Unmanifest and the Manifest, Existence as well as Non-existence, the Supreme Indeterminable.


The Purusha-Sukta proclaims that all this Universe is God as the Supreme Person – the Purusha with thousands of heads, thousands of eyes, thousands of limbs in His Cosmic Body. He envelops the whole cosmos and transcends it to infinity.


The Narayana-Sukta exclaims that whatever is anywhere, visible or invisible, all this is pervaded by Narayana within and without.


The Hiranyagarbha-Sukta of the Rig-Veda declares that God manifested Himself in the beginning as the Creator of the Universe, encompassing all things, including everything within Himself, the collective totality, as it were, of the whole of creation, animating it as the Supreme Intelligence.


The Satarudriya or Rudra-Adhyaya of the Yajur-Veda identifies all things, the high and the low, the moving and the unmoving, the good and the bad, the beautiful and the ugly, nay, every conceivable thing, with the all-pervading Siva or Rudra as the Supreme God.


The Isavasya Upanishad says that the whole Universe is pervaded by Isvara or God, who is both within and without it. He is the moving and the unmoving, He is far and near, He is within all these and without all these.

The Kena Upanishad
says that the Supreme Reality is beyond the perception of the senses and the mind because the senses and the mind can visualise and conceive only the objects, while Reality is the Supreme Subject, the very precondition of all sensation, thinking, understanding, etc. No one can behold God because He is the beholder of all things.


The Kathopanishad has it that God is the Root of this Tree of world existence. The realisation of God is regarded as the Supreme blessedness or Shreyas, as apart from Preyas or temporal experience of satisfaction.
The Prasna Upanishad says that God is the Supreme Prajapati or Creator, in whom are blended both the matter and energy of the Universe. God is symbolised in Pranava, or Omkara.


The Mundaka Upanishad gives the image of the Supreme Being as the One Ocean into which all the rivers of individual existence enter and with which they become one, as their final goal.


The Mandukya Upanishad regards the Supreme Being as the Turiya, or the Transcendent Consciousness, beyond the stales of waking, dreaming and deep sleep.


The Taittiriya Upanishad regards the Reality as the Atman, or the Self, beyond the physical, vital, mental, intellectual and causal aspects(sheaths) of the personality. It also identifies this Atman with the Supreme Absolute, or Brahman.


The Aitareya Upanishad states that the Supreme Atman has manifested itself as the objective Universe from the one side and the subjective individuals on the other side, in which process, factors which are effects of God's creation become causes of individual's perception, by a reversal of the process.


The Chhandogya Upanishad says that all this Universe is Brahman Manifest in all its states of manifestation. It regards objects as really aspects of the one Subject known as the Vaishvanara-Atman. It also holds that the Supreme Being is the Infinite, or Bhuma, in which one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, and understands nothing else except the Self as the only, existence.


In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad we are told that the Supreme Being is Pure Consciousness, in which subjects and objects merge together in a state of Universality.


The Supreme Being knew only Itself as 'I-Am', inclusive of everything. As He is the Knower of all things, no one can know Him, except as 'He Is'.


The Svetasvatara Upanishad says, 'Thou art the Woman', 'Thou art the Man', 'Thou art Girl', 'Thou art Boy', 'Thou deceivest us as the old man tottering with the stick', 'Thou movest everywhere, in the form of everything, in all directions', 'Thou art the dark-blue Butterfly, and the Green Parrot with red eyes', 'Thou art the thunder cloud, the Seasons and the Oceans', 'Thou art without beginning and beyond all time and space', 'Thou art That from which all the Universes are born'. 'That alone is Fire. That is the Sun. That is Air, That is the Moon, That is also the starry firmament, That is the waters, That is Prajapati, That is Brahman.'

That Divine Being, who, though Himself formless, gives rise to various forms in different ways with the help of His Supreme Power for His own inscrutable purpose, and Who dissolves the whole Universe in Himself in the end – may He endow us with pure understanding.


He is the Great Being who shines effulgent like the Sun, beyond all darkness. Knowing Him alone one crosses beyond death. There is no other way of going over there.


The One God, Creator of the heaven and earth, is possessed of all eyes, all faces, all hands, and all feet in this Universe. It is He who inspires all to do their respective functions, as if fanning their fire into flames of movement.


Manu says in his Smriti: In the beginning, all this existence was one Undifferentiated Mass of Unmanifestedness, unknown, indefinable, unarguable and unknown in every way. From this Supreme Condition arose the Universe of name and form, through the medium of the Self-existent Creator, Swayambhu.

The Mahabharata says that Narayana alone was in the beginning, who was the prius of the creative, preservative, and destructive principles, the Trinity known as Brahma, Vishnu and Siva – the Supreme Hari, multi-headed, multi-eyed, multi-footed, multi-armed, multi-limbed. This was the Supreme Seed of all creation, subtler than the subtlest, greater than the greatest, larger than the largest, and more magnificent than even the best of all things, more powerful, than even the wind and all the gods, more resplendent than the Sun and the Moon, and more internal than even the mind and the intellect. He is the Creator, the Father Supreme.


The Bhagavadgita in the Mahabharata, says: The Supreme Brahman is beyond existence and non-existence. It has hands and feet everywhere, heads, mouths, eyes everywhere, ears everywhere, and it exists enveloping everything. Undivided, it appears as divided among beings; attributeless, it appears to have attributes in association with things. It is the Light of all lights, beyond all darkness, and is situated in the hearts of all beings.


He is the sacrifice, He is the oblation, He is the performer thereof, He is the recitation or the chant, He is the sacred fire, He is what is offered into it. He is the father, the mother, the grandfather, the support, the One knowable Thing, He is the three Vedas, the Goal of all beings, the Protector, the Reality, the Witness, the Repository, the Refuge, the Friend, the beginning, the middle and the end of all things. He is immortality and death, existence as well as non-existence. He is the Visvarupa, the Cosmic Form, blazing like fire and consuming all things.


According to the Bhagavata and the Mahabharata, God especially manifested Himself as Bhagavan Sri Krishna, who is regarded as the foremost of the divine Incarnations, in whose personality the Supreme Being is fully focussed and manifest.


Srimad Bhagavata says: He is Brahman(the Absolute), Paramatman(God), Bhagavan(the Incarnation).


According to the Pancharatra Agama and the Vaishnava theology, God has five forms: the Para or the Transcendent, Antaryamin or the Immanent, Vyuha or the Collective(known as Vasudeva, Sankarshana, Pradyumna and Aniruddha), Vibhava or the Incarnation, and Archa or the symbolic form of daily worship.



According to Saiva tradition, God is Pati, the Lord who controls the individuals known as Pasu, with His Power known as Pasa.



According to the Sakta tradition, God is the Divine Universal Mother of all things, Adi-sakti, or the original Creative Power, manifesting Herself as Kriya-Sakti or Durga, Ichha-Sakti or Lakshmi, and Jnana-Sakti or Sarasvati. But the Supreme Mother is beyond all these forms. She is One, alone, without a second.


According to the Bhakti tradition, God is the Supreme Object of Love, in respect of Whom love is evinced as in respect of one's father, mother, friend, son, master, or one's own beloved, in the five forms of affection, known as Shanta, Sakhya, Vatsalya, Dasya and Madhurya.


To the Vaishnavas, God is in Vaikuntha as Vishnu. To the Saivas, God is in Kailasa as Siva, or Rudra. To the Saktas, God is in Manidvipa, as the Supreme Sakti or the Divine Mother. To the Ganapatyas, God is Ganesa, or Ganapati. To the Sauras, God is Surya, the Sun. To the Kaumaras, God is Kumara, or Skanda.


To the saints like Tulasidas, God is Rama; to those like Surdas, He is Krishna. To those like Kabirdas, He is the Impersonal, Attributeless One, known by various names for purposes of worship and meditation.


All the Vaishnava saints worship Him as either Rama or Krishna, Narayana or Vishnu. The Saiva saints worship Him as Paramasiva. The Saktas worship Him as Adi-sakti. The philosopher-saints worship Him as Brahman, the Absolute, as Isvara, Hiranyagarbha, and Virat or the Cosmic Being.


The Virat-Saivas worship God as Siva, especially manifest as the Linga(symbolised in the rounded sacred stone which they wear round their necks).


The symbol of Vishnu is the Saligrama, the symbol of Siva is the Linga, and the symbol of Devi is the Yantra(sometimes, a Mantra).


According to the Nyaya and Vaiseshika schools, God is the instrumental cause of creation, like a potter fashioning a pot of clay, but not the material cause of creation.


The Samkhya school holds that there are only two Primary Principles, Purusha and Prakriti, and creation is only a manifestation or evolution of the constituents of Prakriti due to the action of Purusha's consciousness. There is no other God than these two Principles.


The Yoga school of Patanjali
accepts God's existence as a Special Purusha free from all afflictions, Karma the effects of Karmas and impressions or potencies of a binding nature. But this Purusha, known as Isvara, according to Patanjali's Yoga System, is not the creator of the world, but a Witness thereof. Nor is He the goal of the aspirations of the Jivas or individuals.


The Yogavasishtha defines Reality as the Consciousness which is between and transcends the subjective and objective aspects in perception and cognition, etc. Consciousness is the Absolute, Brahman, the only existence, of which the world is only an appearance.


The Brahmasutra states that God is That from Whom this Universe proceeds, in Whom it subsists, and to Whom, in the end, it returns.


Kalidasa, in his Raghuvamsa and Kumarasambhava, points out that God is the Supreme Being, is prior to the forms of Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, who are three aspects or phases of God, and that Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, being three forms of one and the same Reality, are equal to one another in every respect, without inferiority or superiority among them.


Bhartrihari prays to that Infinite Consciousness, which is Peaceful Effulgence, which is undifferentiated by the interference of space, time and causal relation, etc., and whose essence is Self-Experience alone.



Madhusudana Sarasvati blends Advaita Vedanta and Bhakti-Rasa, and he is the author of the most polemical and authoritative Advaita text, known as the 'Advaitasiddhi', and of an unparalleled compendium of the various processes and stages of devotion to God, known as 'Bhaktirasayana'. His commentary on the Bhagavadgita is a monument of a fusion of knowledge of the Impersonal Absolute with devotion to the Personal God.

Religions are founded on a metaphysical rock-bottom. There is a philosophical import behind every ethical canon.



Generally, the tradition of worship of Deities in India is according to a sort of protocol which the devotees associate with the importance of the Deities. For instance, worshippers of a particular Deity, such as Ganesa, Siva, Vishnu, Surya or Skanda, will place their own Deity as the first in importance and every other Deity as secondary. There is another tradition according to which the order of worship places Ganesa as the first, to be worshipped on any occasion, and then Devi, Siva, Vishnu, Surya and Skanda. This order may get slightly changed in different circles of religious belief. But the discourses recorded in this book do not follow any of these patterns but a chronological arrangement according to the festivals that come one after the other, seriatim, during the course of the calendar of the year, that is, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year. The functions and festivals repeat themselves every year on specific days or dates. Thus, the order in which the functions or the Deities of worship are mentioned here follow their calendar-wise chronology.


The Concept of God in Hinduism by Swami Krishnananda
 
Is this not proof, if any proof is at all required, that none of the above schools/philosophies have actually seen or experienced that GOD, but have been (mis)guiding the followers?

These philosophies have created each their own god/sets of gods. These do not point to the one true God who has created us.
 
Mathematical genius Ramanjuan says that each number is GOD for him. Whenever we wanted to solve a simple equation, we always keep the "solution" as X....that is LET IT BE X. Then we start solving the equation to arrive at the value of X. That is what we are doing...We have already called "GOD" X (as expressed different ways by saints and others)....but still we are finding it difficult to solve (or still solving for centuries) the equation to find out about X.
 
Is this not proof, if any proof is at all required, that none of the above schools/philosophies have actually seen or experienced that GOD, but have been (mis)guiding the followers?

These philosophies have created each their own god/sets of gods. These do not point to the one true God who has created us.
I think Islam has done that by the following message .
"There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his messanger".
 
Is this not proof, if any proof is at all required, that none of the above schools/philosophies have actually seen or experienced that GOD, but have been (mis)guiding the followers?

These philosophies have created each their own god/sets of gods. These do not point to the one true God who has created us.

1. Who said these are proof? These are just hypotheses. There can not be a proof -is the position of these hypotheses. so don't waste time looking for a proof in them.

2. Besides all these there is another hypothesis. There is no god. At the end of it all when the physical system comes to an end, it is just end and there is nothing more. This is also without a proof because no one knows what happens after the end. No one has come back and told us. so this hypothesis called Atheism too has no proof.

3. There is another wonderful non-thesis. I do not know as on date whether there is a god, or not. My equipments and apparatuses as on date are inadequate to find out this. so I accept no God nor any no-god. I am neither here nor there. Somewhere I hang in the middle and waiting for the revelation or realization.

Dear respected samgom sirji, you are in the 3rd category.

There is no use criticising the category 1 or 2 people. Because you have really nothing to prove or disprove their thesis.

Just go your way and try to reach realization. come back and tell us with proof what you found or keep exploring till the end.

and the bird sitting on the tree outside my Bedroom window asks me "How do people claim that a true God created people? Any proof?" Before I could say shut up it flew away.
 
You are in select company, and one which is shrinking everyday. There is no need to fight over issues which are on the wane.

Is this not proof, if any proof is at all required, that none of the above schools/philosophies have actually seen or experienced that GOD, but have been (mis)guiding the followers?

These philosophies have created each their own god/sets of gods. These do not point to the one true God who has created us.
 
1. Who said these are proof? These are just hypotheses. There can not be a proof -is the position of these hypotheses. so don't waste time looking for a proof in them.

2. Besides all these there is another hypothesis. There is no god. At the end of it all when the physical system comes to an end, it is just end and there is nothing more. This is also without a proof because no one knows what happens after the end. No one has come back and told us. so this hypothesis called Atheism too has no proof.

3. There is another wonderful non-thesis. I do not know as on date whether there is a god, or not. My equipments and apparatuses as on date are inadequate to find out this. so I accept no God nor any no-god. I am neither here nor there. Somewhere I hang in the middle and waiting for the revelation or realization.

Dear respected samgom sirji, you are in the 3rd category.

There is no use criticising the category 1 or 2 people. Because you have really nothing to prove or disprove their thesis.

Just go your way and try to reach realization. come back and tell us with proof what you found or keep exploring till the end.

and the bird sitting on the tree outside my Bedroom window asks me "How do people claim that a true God created people? Any proof?" Before I could say shut up it flew away.



Vaagmi Sir

There is no need to reply to a 3 rated stuff.
 
Last edited:
Frankly speaking God is the most abused entity.None of us know what He really is and yet so many schools of thoughts exists.

When we read the various school of thoughts..you start to wonder..if they all know God why the heck they describe it so differently and even refute each other?

That shows there is no common ground of understanding and each person has cooked some dish to his liking in his fancy matam restaurant.

That is why after doing some rather extensive reading...from various texts..I have decided to abandon everything cos none are going to lead me anywhere.

So as I kept saying in another post..to exist is finally what it is.

Some might say even an animal exists and they would not want to simply exists like an animal..otherwise why be human?

But for me I feel so what?May be who knows..that is the way..There is NO way and the Only Way is the Highway.

Everything has to get lost from our mind finally.

Now this is totally different from an animal state cos an animal does not yet have mind that can decide as a human..the animal exists based on instincts in an auto pilot mode.

Now for the human..we have read..we have prayed ..we have experienced and finally we discard everything..and simply exists. There is also no need to call ourselves enlightened. We do not have to even seek that.


Its finally up to us To Be or Not To Be. The choice is ours.
 
Last edited:
None of us know what He really is

'None' is not correct. 'Some' is more appropriate.

We know who is paramatma, hi permanent abode, his rupam-gunam-and all divine attributes, because all such knowledge has been given to us by our azhwars, acharyas and scriptures; we believe them and so we know what they saw and knew.

In the mundane world too many believe in black holes, parallel universe, singular point universe at the time of creation etc. because they have been told by scientists they admire and respect. If the non believers think otherwise, the loss is theirs, not ours.
 
'None' is not correct. 'Some' is more appropriate.

We know who is paramatma, hi permanent abode, his rupam-gunam-and all divine attributes, because all such knowledge has been given to us by our azhwars, acharyas and scriptures; we believe them and so we know what they saw and knew.

In the mundane world too many believe in black holes, parallel universe, singular point universe at the time of creation etc. because they have been told by scientists they admire and respect. If the non believers think otherwise, the loss is theirs, not ours.

Why are you assuming that a person who has a different opinion is a Non Believer?

Ok..going back to what you said..coming to various Abodes of God.

Each matam has their opinions too.

For example a Vaishnava will think its Vaikunta and imagine Lord Vishnu there.

Likewise a Shaivite will think of Kailasha and imagine Lord Shiva there.

So finally what is it?

Multiple Lokas?

What if a Vaishava goes to Vaikunta and sees Lord Shiva there instead?

And what if a Shaivite sees Lord Vishnu in Kailash?

So what will happen?

Does anyone actually know?

We do not!

So I rather say none of us know at least to give some form of "respect' to God instead of going on describing Him when I know nothing about Him.

One does not have to be a non believer to simply exists.

In fact to call yourself a believer itself denotes that a state of non -believe can also exist.

So the best is to be 'stateless' and just be.

Finally if there is something to be known let it be revealed and there is no need to influence others to believe us.
 
Last edited:
Frankly speaking God is the most abused entity.None of us know what He really is and yet so many schools of thoughts exists

So many schools of thought exists no doubt but it does not mean "None of us know what He really is" .
Each person knows God in the way he/she wants and there are also people who believe that there is no God and some prefer not to talk about God at all i.e either for /against . Some switch from believers to non beleivers and vice versa based on the circumstances in their life .
 
So many schools of thought exists no doubt but it does not mean "None of us know what He really is" .
Each person knows God in the way he/she wants and there are also people who believe that there is no God and some prefer not to talk about God at all i.e either for /against . Some switch from believers to non beleivers and vice versa based on the circumstances in their life .

I am not talking about switching modes becos of circumstances.

I am talking about an understanding that finally reaches to a state where we really know nothing.

That is when we know that we simply have to exists.

That state is neither Theistic nor Atheistic nor Agnostic. I call it "stateless".
 
You are tying yourself into knots; you are free to believe or disbelieve in any established system or start a new best-stateless-non believer-believer state system with exclusive self referencing and tippanis. One more renuka-bhashya is not going to derail sanatan dharmam. Good luck.

Why are you assuming that a person who has a different opinion is a Non Believer?

Ok..going back to what you said..coming to various Abodes of God.

Each matam has their opinions too.

For example a Vaishnava will think its Vaikunta and imagine Lord Vishnu there.

Likewise a Shaivite will think of Kailasha and imagine Lord Shiva there.

So finally what is it?

Multiple Lokas?

What if a Vaishava goes to Vaikunta and sees Lord Shiva there instead?

And what if a Shaivite sees Lord Vishnu in Kailash?

So what will happen?

Does anyone actually know?

We do not!

So I rather say none of us know at least to give some form of "respect' to God instead of going on describing Him when I know nothing about Him.

One does not have to be a non believer to simply exists.

In fact to call yourself a believer itself denotes that a state of non -believe can also exist.

So the best is to be 'stateless' and just be.

Finally if there is something to be known let it be revealed and there is no need to influence others to believe us.
 
You are tying yourself into knots; you are free to believe or disbelieve in any established system or start a new best-stateless-non believer-believer state system with exclusive self referencing and tippanis. One more renuka-bhashya is not going to derail sanatan dharmam. Good luck.

:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:
 
When It comes down to Proof, belief and faith helps; I accept the evidence I have seen as enough to support my belief.
 
Last edited:
You are tying yourself into knots; you are free to believe or disbelieve in any established system or start a new best-stateless-non believer-believer state system with exclusive self referencing and tippanis. One more renuka-bhashya is not going to derail sanatan dharmam. Good luck.

There is no rail track to start with..so the question of de-railing does not arise.

I am not tying myself into knots..we eventually have to even get rid of the rope that was used to churn the mind using the mountain of information....initially there might be toxic fumes of attachment and desires then finally the amrit emerges and finally even that amrit has to be given up.

Many keep wanting to taste that amrit..not knowing that even that hankering needs to be given up.One has to withdraw even that desire like how a tortoise withdraws its limbs.

O' Humans..give up even the desire for nectar,
It tastes sweet and binds you for more..
Why churn your mind again..
When you do not need the rope or mountain anymore!
 
Last edited:
I think Islam has done that by the following message .
"There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is his messanger".

I tend to agree with the first part of what is said above. It seems to me that what Adishankara has said, as his "advaita" or non-dual philosophy, is also very much the same message, viz., that there is only one TRUTH or REALITY and all that we see and experience in this world are like dreams only. (You may correct me if I am wrong.)

But, for people mistaking the dreams to be true, they will not be able to think beyond their dream state of existence. That is the essential mystery of life!
 
I tend to agree with the first part of what is said above. It seems to me that what Adishankara has said, as his "advaita" or non-dual philosophy, is also very much the same message, viz., that there is only one TRUTH or REALITY and all that we see and experience in this world are like dreams only. (You may correct me if I am wrong.)
But, for people mistaking the dreams to be true, they will not be able to think beyond their dream state of existence. That is the essential mystery of life!

If " there is only one TRUTH or REALITY and all that we see and experience in this world are like dreams only" , pray tell me WHO dreams? Is it that the dream itself dreams?

In the absence of an answer to this, the dismissal of people as ones with lesser abilities is just so much of an alphabet soup without any flavour. LOL.
 
If " there is only one TRUTH or REALITY and all that we see and experience in this world are like dreams only" , pray tell me WHO dreams? Is it that the dream itself dreams?

In the absence of an answer to this, the dismissal of people as ones with lesser abilities is just so much of an alphabet soup without any flavour. LOL.

A kindergarten student may not (I think, even today) understand Integral Calculus or Spherical trigonometry. Such children should follow the dictum from a wiseacre cuckoo (called vickoo) which once said, "Those who are not at that level can best be mute witnesses when such discussion takes place free from malice and bitterness." (emphasis mine)
 
A kindergarten student may not (I think, even today) understand Integral Calculus or Spherical trigonometry. Such children should follow the dictum from a wiseacre cuckoo (called vickoo) which once said, "Those who are not at that level can best be mute witnesses when such discussion takes place free from malice and bitterness." (emphasis mine)

I looked for an answer to my simple question viz. "Who is dreaming?" in the above quoted post and was disappointed. Again the freshly cooked and served alphabet soup had no flavour in it nor any aroma, rather the stink was up to the heavens. LOL. Half-baked knowledge and arrogance are a deadly combination. LOL.

I enjoyed the comedy. Thanks.
 
Yes , you are right Vaagmi Sir,

:clap2:
:clap2::clap2:


with less than half baked knowledge some members vomit sheer nonsense here.
 
Dear Sri PJ

I did not know about Swami Krishnananda's website and his contribution until I saw your post.
Thanks for sharing this link.It was worthwhile reading the opening post and then following up on other writings of Swami Krishnanda

I think the context in which this particular compilation of definitions makes sense in his site but in isolation there are some issues in my mind.

Regardless it is a useful summary.

I will share my views in another post
 
The compilation of Swami Krishnananda couples those descriptions that are subject to *understanding only* with those that arise out of theological thoughts. Theology has its root in imagination for most part and may be useful for the emotional 'growth' of a person in the beginning of one's journey of discovery if they are so inclined.

It could be a serious impediment for those truly seeking the truth unless they attain a more mature understanding Isvara. Here are samples of some of my reasons.

1. Many theologies of almost all religions coming under the umbrella of Hinduism borrow certain vision from the Upanishads , ignore almost all others and let the imagination take care of the rest in order to weave a set of promises to its followers. These promises range from eternal life in heaven (after death) to Gold and valuables produced by Godmen here and now and heaven later. Regardless their currency is fear of some kind or the other or promise to fulfill greed.

When a definition of God mixes "vision that requires understanding" with "ideas that rely on imagination, greed and fear", the resulting theology is nothing but imagination only. The conjunction here is 'AND' for those into logic (Truth AND False is still False). A science fiction movie may employ scientists to ensure believability but it is still fiction in the end and not science.

All the description in the compilation arising out of Upanishad indeed have a unified vision. This is often ignored in the theology supported by the religions. But Upanishadic descriptions are used selectively to bolster the imagination in a theology.

2. Human beings by and large are 'normal' (that is they not locked up in an asylum) but delusional. You can say we are normally delusional as to how we are raised.

Those that are locked up to protect the 'normally delusional' tend to be 'delusionally delusional'. It is not possible to be delusionally normal (though for those that are 'normally delusional' certain Mahatmas could come across as delusional occasionally). My discussion here is only about 'normally delusional' here includes all of us.


This is true throughout history in all nations. After all generations lasting over many centuries believed that sun was going around the earth even when there were evidence to the contrary but the fear of religious theologies kept people from making progress.

In ancient India there was true freedom of speech as evidenced by the philosophical and scientific ideas that has emerged from that era. However the large number of people tended to be still 'normally delusional' even then.

Religions and traditions for lifelong adoption without any emotional growth appeals to those that are 'normally delusional'. Normally normal are very rare and their teachings rarely appeal to most people. This has been so throughout recorded history even in India . Sri Sankara Bhashya details many conversations with opposing viewpoints - some may have happened and some may be imagined. These are included to expound a topic area fully in the commentaries.

In one of the chapters of B.Gita, there is a 'Purvapakshi Siddhantha' debate where an objection is raised that if one were to listen to what Sri Sankara is saying then it would mean the end to all religions (all Kamya Karma oriented Vedic mantras, all Karma oriented rituals etc). In other words the Purvapakshi is worried about preservation of the rituals and traditions rather than seek the truth. Sri Sankara replies there is no cause to worry and that the number of followers for such teaching will be extremely small always.

Even today if one wants to raise money for a good humanitarian cause or to create an institution of Vedantic studies there will be hardly many stepping up. But if one wants to build a temple the donors come from all over the place.

The normally delusional do not like to get their idea challenged and want to believe in a powerful God (often in human image) who will bestow all kinds of goodies for them.

The Upanishadic ideas are used to bolster the imagination for the normally delusional. So coupling the list of vision and imagination is not useful.

3. Guru worship: All those that are into theologies and imagination require an intermediary always and they are deified.
The reason is that concept of God cannot be grasped by mind. After all the cause of this daunting universe (or multiverse) cannot be grasped because it is not possible to describe it (and this is well explained in many of the Upanishads and even referenced in Nasadiya Suktham). Then there are verses in B.Gita that refers to this vision while within a few verses later it refers to a Isvara of all kinds of attributes. So an intermediary is needed who become the messenger for the 'normally delusional'. Even those proclaiming Advita as source of understanding often approach it more like a religion and deify Sri Sankara. The mixing of definition God (of theologies) and Isvara (of Upanishads) tend to only bolster the imagination and delegates the thinking to the intermediary who is a deity the the normally delusional can relate to.

I know this post will not appeal to most people. The greatness of our teaching is that they can allow for all these imaginations to coexist without putting them down ( like I may come across as doing here) but for those desiring to go beyond rituals and imaginations they may want to focus on the descriptions in the compilation that is 'subject to understanding' only
 
It must be hard for most people to make head or tails out of Post #1 though it seems to describe something abstract. I do not know how this all relates to courses taught by Sri Sri Ravi Shankar who is very popular all over the world
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top