Trying to bribe GOD

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

When people have problems they pray to god and also perform rituals, pooja etc for propitiating God so that the problem could be solved. This is a common and laid down practice as per the scriptures.

The other method is that they take a vow that they will perform some action or offer some money if the wish is granted or the problem solved. The action offered (like shaving off one's head etc) or the amount depends on the benefit gained or the nature of the problem. Like some one says he will offer 108 coconuts or Rs. 1000 to god if he gets a promotion in his job. This is a very common practice.

Being Omniscient and Omnipotent I do not think God is in need of or influenced by our offers of Gifts. Some of the prayers in Hindi in fact talk of offering what is his to God. I remember a rationalist friend of mine remarking how GOD can take care of us when he could not take of his jewels. This was when we were discussing a case of jewel theft in a temple. My answer was very simple. Just because we value jewels, it does not mean that GOD values the jewels. Why should GOD who is the owner of the Universe bother about some trinkets offered by us?

My question is, in what way is this different from offering money to a person in an organization for getting something done? When you offer money to a person for showing you a favour you call it a bribe. A person who takes a bribe does a person a favour, which he does not do to others who do not bribe him. By offering money to God we ask him to do us a favour over others. Bribe is given on the condition that the job gets done. The offer to God is also fulfilled only when the job is done not otherwise.

Many a time even the vow is never fulfilled because after all God cannot come and remind anyone of his vow. Only when the person is faced with another problem or wants another favour, does he remember his earlier vow. I remember one instance when a person had offered 1008 sweetmeats to god for fulfillment of a wish. The wish was fulfilled, but the person never completed his vow. After about 10 years he remembered the vow. The cost of the sweet meat had gone up during this period. So while it would have taken Rs.1000 then it would cost Rs.5000 now. The person was arguing that more than the number of sweetmeats it is the amount that matters and the vow will be fulfilled if he offers Rs.1000 worth sweet meats now.

It boils down to bargaining with God. The pity is that this attitude of offering something to God in return for a favour is cultivated from childhood. So when the child grows up he does not think it is wrong to offer an amount to another person for getting a favour. This encourages corruption.

You may say that this is stretching this too far. I do not know. In India people of all religions do this. I believe that this practice should stop. We can pray, beseech God for favours or solutions to our problems. Once the problem is solved we can thank God by offering anything. But no conditional offer or vow. That will be tantamount to trying to bribe God.

The question is are we trying to please God. Is he pleased with this kind of offering? Very often I was asked a question by many of my colleagues. Is this kind of offering better than regular prayers?

The people who believe they succeed with this kind of offering continue to indulge in this practice, and are often contemptuous of the people who pray regularly. People do pray regularly to God for material benefits. Whenever we visit a temple someone asks us whether it is in fulfillment of a vow. When we reply that it is not you should see the look on their face.

Again how does this fit in with the transfer of merit (karma) theory? We ask for the fruits of our action even before the action. This practice does not seem to fit in with the philosophy of Hinduism and does not seem to have any scriptural sanction. This has also led to businessmen making God a silent partner who shares in all the profits as well as the bad deeds committed. In Tamil Nadu we have a God known as 75% God. It is believed that you offer 25% in advance and the God will return 100%.

It also brings out the point about knowing what is good for us. What may be good in the short term may not be good in the long run. When we progress in our religious practice we reach a stage where you pray without Sankalpa (expectations). All that you want is God's blessings. But since most of us are still part of the world, results like humiliation, insults, loss etc. does hurt us.

If we teach our children about such practices (by word and example) they will also believe that it is necessary only to make a vow to God when you are in trouble or want something done. I remember my son remarking once that some of his friends ring the bell in the school temple only on the day the results are announced. In Malayalam ringing a bell (maniyatikkal) means trying to please others.

I request the members to respond.

 

[kunjuppu]

..
It also brings out the point about knowing what is good for us. What may be good in the short term may not be good in the long run. When we progress in our religious practice we reach a stage where you pray without Sankalpa (expectations). .

nacchi,

these words should be etched in gold! exactly my view and i have stated this in other threads too. to me, God is not a merchant to bargain for value. perhaps to some, who DO bargain, it is a succour against current ill fortune? maybe it helps them tide the bad times and helps them cope?

 

[CLN]

There are two types of offerings people generally make.

(1) When man feels helpless after all his efforts to achieve some thing fail, or his efforts to prevent some thing bad and dreadful fail and the thing happens, it is not unnatural for him to turn to some entity whom he considers to be more powerful or capable than him for help. Perfectly legitimate! This could be God, whom he believes to have the necessary powers and abilities, or, some one powerful in the society (like a minister, or, a senior official, or a dada, for example). It is an understandable act from an average human.

Perhaps, after what he desired to happen by the interference of God, or minister or senior official or dada, actually happens, he may show his gratitude for the help he got from God or minister or senior official or dada, as the case maybe, by offering what he is capable of and what he can afford. If this is the way only things happen, no one may term it as bribe. This is the first type.

(2) The offering is often made in advance, hoping to please either God, or minister, or senior official or dada! Except in the case God, the others usually have their rates already fixed, according to the nature and quantum of help they have the power to provide, and the "devotee" (of God or minister or senior official or dada) does not have much choice.

A slightly different variation is the one in which a middle man - a power broker, who, by himself, does not possess power or authority to do what the 'client' desires (ex: a job or a promotion, a business contract, a medical seat or some other similar objective), but has access to the one who can actually do, by virtue of the key position he may be occupying (a personal secretary or a close relative or a body guard etc.). The percentage of advance may vary from 0 % to 100 %, here!

No one will call the first type as bribe. But the second type, with or without a middle man, is certainly bribe. Many Godmen, poojaris and maanthrikas are nothing but middlemen, of the type mentioned above, with a difference. They are in the middle, only from the clients' belief POV. In reality, they are not middle men, but are only conmen! God does not employ or require any middle man!

Will people realize how they are taken for a ride by these conmen and stop nurturing them?

 

[sangom]

Why should GOD who is the owner of the Universe bother about some trinkets offered by us?

We can pray, beseech God for favours or solutions to our problems. Once the problem is solved we can thank God by offering anything. But no conditional offer or vow. That will be tantamount to trying to bribe God.

the members to respond.

Shri Nachinarkiniyan,

From the aforesaid portions (emphasized by yourself) does it not appear that you go as near to bribing as is normally done in day-to-day life? Except for comparatively small favours - a berth in a train for which one has only a travel ticket, is one good example - the favour and bribe are almost simultaneous. but for bigger favours, say some huge IT or excise duty relief, first the would-be beneficiary beseeches the official for favours or solutions to his problems. On the official being found favourably inclined, the beneficiary gives a percentage of the amount as advance, just to show his sincerity to the deal. It is purely one way; if the official does not extend any favour (like god does in 50% instances statistically) that is the end and the advance is gone! If, however, the official really gives the favour, the beneficiary (normally) carries out his original promise. (In case he reneges, the official will have many, many ways of harassing the poor fellow in times to come just as god has and deivakOvam, deivakkuttam is said to befall those who renege or honestly forget their promises!

Hence if you agree as far as thanksgiving to god, nERcais are not very different in essence, only a matter of fine distinction and hair-splitting interpretation.

The more basic question is, why should god, who according to you, is the owner of the Universe, be worshipped? Who bestowed such ownership on god and how? Why should God "own" the universe and what benefit does he get from that? If it is just an unwanted burden for god, why is he unable to unload that burden? Or, is it that this load of the ownership of the universe has been placed irrevocably on god's shoulders just like Atlas holding the skies?

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Making a Vow is a well known practice in all religions. The Bible talks about it. But it is not encouraged. It is human nature. Whenever some one is sick the whole lot of relatives go on a Venduthal or Nerchai spree. Grand Mothers are famous for making Venduthal which are difficult to fulfill.

Let us see what Christianity says about this.

The principle here is clear for Christians: do not make vows, either to the Lord or to one another. First, we are unable to know for sure whether we will be able to keep vows. The fact that we are prone to the errors in judgment which are part of our fallen nature means that we may make vows foolishly and/or because of immaturity. Further, we don’t know what the future will bring—only God does. We don’t know what will happen tomorrow (James 4:14), so to make a vow that we will do or not do something is foolish. God is the one in control, not us, and He “works all things together for good for those who love Him and are called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28). Knowing this, we can see that it is unnecessary to make vows and indicates a lack of trust in Him. Finally, Jesus commands that our word be sufficient without making vows. When we say ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ that’s exactly what we should mean.

What does the Bible say about keeping your vows / oaths?

Hinduism also does not encourage these kind of vows for exactly the same reasons which I had stated in my first post. We are expected to perform Homas, do Japa and pray in general.

It may look like hair splitting to many but for religious people who believe in GOD it makes a lot of difference.

When we were small children, on the day of the examination we used to do a lot of Thoppukaranams to Pillaiyar and pray that we should do well in our examination. We did not promise to give him any Kozhakkattai. May be our mothers did.

We lost that innocence when we grew up and started making promises to GOD in return for favors.

I can understand the villagers and other people who are not conversant with Hindu religious practices doing it. Even here many of the Swamijis and other teachers are trying to teach them how to pray and do simple Pujas. I remember Mata Amrithanandamayi teaching the people how to have an image of a Deity at home and do Puja. Swami Chinmayananda was also very keen on every one doing a Puja and praying.

But Brahmins indulging in this kind of practice is strange to say the least.

Though middle men do play a role, it is not fair the put the blame entirely on them.

Let us teach our children to pray to GOD. Let them pray to him for whatever they want. That is what the overwhelming majority of the people do.

But no bargains/bribes.

More things are wrought by prayer

Than this world dreams of.

Wherefore, let thy voice

Rise like a fountain for me night and day.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Thank you, Kunjuppu.

This is a topic which I would love to talk about. May be in another new thread?

 

[Nara]

....The more basic question is, why should god, who according to you, is the owner of the Universe, be worshipped?

Dear Shri Sangom sir, this is an excellent question for which I feel there is no convincing answer. In a way I feel prayer with an implicit bargain is somewhat understandable. But, in general, prayer and worship, with or without a quid pro quo, is logically indefensible. More about this a little later.

But first, it is my understanding that even Adi Sankarachariya (AS), let alone Bhagavat Ramanuja (BR) approved of poorvamimamsa rituals and Bhakti for a material end. It is their contention that even such business-deal kind of Bhakti is good as it conditions the mind of the devotee to slowly realize the ephemeral nature of material things and seek the truly priceless bounty of "true knowledge" in the case of AS and sarva-kala, sarva-desha, sarva-avastai kainkaryam to Lord Sriman Narayana in the case of BR.

Even Lord Sri Krishna declares lovingly of four kinds of Bhaktas in Srimat BG #7.16, (i) seeking to regain lost the wealth (Arta), (ii) seeking new wealth (artthArtthI), (iii) seeking pure knowledge about self (jijnyAsu), and (iv) one who seeks the Lord himself (jnjAni).

சதுர்விதா பஜந்தே மாம் ஜநா: ஸுக்ருதிநோர்ஜுந |
ஆர்த்தோ ஜிஜ்ஞாஸுர் அர்த்தார்த்தீ ஜ்ஞாநீ ச ப்ரதர்ஷப ||
​

Kindly note that Lord Sri Krishna says all these four are "janA: sukruthina:" in other words, people with a load of punyam. Of the four, Lord Sri Krishna says in shloka 18, jnyAni is his his own atmA (ஜ்ஞாநீ து ஆத்மைவ).

If all this is to be taken seriously, then it looks like Lord Sri Krishna himself is okay with Bhakti predicated upon a quid pro quo. Some ask for things of transient value, while others ask for things that are supposed to be of greater value. In all cases, there is quid pro quo, even in cases when you leave it to god to figure out what is good for you. The lord ain't giving anything away free, you have to beg for it, through your prayer.

So, in summary, I feel simple people, knowing no better, praying for something concrete is deserving of our sympathetic understanding than the ones who pray for no purpose at all.

But I am unable to take any of this seriously. An omnipotent and compassionate god who owns the universe makes no sense at all given so much "evil" and grief in this world, whether or not caused by some unseen force of poorva-janma-karma -- he can't be omnipotent if this karma is an independent force.

Perhaps this god is compassionate but not omnipotent -- then why pray to him? Perhaps he is omnipotent but not compassionate -- then he is a capricious dictator, not worthy of being prayed to, unless you have some favor in mind that he can grant you. Perhaps this god does not care about human affairs -- then why pray to him for anything at all. In summary, I feel, praying with some sort of business deal in mind, like money, passing exam, or release from "samsara", or praying with no business deal in mind, both are utterly illogical.

Let me end with this quote from the Greek philosopher, Epicurous:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
​

Cheers!

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Nara,

Will you agree if I say that the Bhakti cult which started its ascendency from about the fifth or sixth century of the Christian era, has completely muddied the earlier poorvameemamsa, and, going by the timing, it had the same evil effect on the much vaunted "sanatana dharma" of yore as Christian proselytization is supposed to be harming the sanatanadharma of today?

 

[Nara]

....Will you agree if I say that the Bhakti cult which started its ascendency from about the fifth or sixth century of the Christian era, has completely muddied the earlier poorvameemamsa, and, going by the timing, it had the same evil effect on the much vaunted "sanatana dharma" of yore as Christian proselytization is supposed to be harming the sanatanadharma of today?

Dear Shri Sangom sir, there are three very complex issues you are referencing here, (i) Brahminism as existed before about 6th century Common Era, (ii) Bhakti movement, and (iii) how Christian proselytizing is impacting Hinduism in general today. I am sure your views will be much more informative than mine, but I shall give mine following the principle that the least should go first.

I can't talk about Bhakti movement in general, but, from what little I know of the SV bhakti movement, I can confidently say that it did reject poorva-mimamsa rituals as an independent means for release, but did not reject poorvamimamsa altogether like Buddhists or Jainas. Thenkalai SVs were more expansive in their rejection of rituals to the point of deriding those who are preoccupied with them. The Vadakalais, more dominated by Brahmins than the Thenkalais at that time, were more circumspect, they did advocate Prapatti to be a guaranteed means for release, but they did not reject rituals altogether.

I am not so sure about the second point that Christian proselytization affected the so called Sanatana Darma (SD) in anyway. For one thing, it is the Brahmins, the keepers of the SD orthodoxy, who are voluntarily abandoning it or diluting it. Also, the proselytizers seem to be successful in converting only Dalits. In as much as the Dalits are assiduously kept outside SD, the keepers of SD can't complain about these conversion anyway, isn't? Where as, the SV Bhakti movement, at least initially, brought Dalits into its fold and declared jAti has no significance. This must have been seen as much more of a threat to orthodox SD.

So, when we consider the fact that the SV Bhakti movement brought the people who cannot be touched or even seen into its fold, and Christian proselytization took them away making it less likely that SD followers will have to deal with them, IMO, the SV Bhakti movement started out doing more harm to SD than the Chrisitian proselytizers today. Of course, the Brahmin converts to SV successfully put a stop to all this and prevented the Bhakti movement from realizing its full potential. So, ultimately neither SV Bhakti movement then, nor the Christian proselytizers today, posed any lasting harm to SD.

Cheers!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Sarva Shri. Sangom and Nara,

Your discussions regarding GOD and Bhakthi movement takes the focus away from the point of discussion here Viz. Are we trying to Bribe GOD?

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Nacchinarkiniyan ji,

I lost my dad at a very young age of five. I did not have much direction/advice from anyone after that. I essentially grew up alone, left to follow whatever I was interested in since then.

I did not do very well in school - but somehow managed to attain what some would consider as somewhat a high education. I have done fairly well considering the circumstances I was blessed with in my youth.

I am a follower of Bhagawan Ramana Maharishi today. It so happened after I lost my wife after 30 years of marriage, strange circumstances led me to Him.

I prayed to my Hindu Gods two times with bribes. Once during my B.Sc. exams, when I had doubts whether I would even pass, I prayed to Anjaneya. I aced the exams, and did ask my mother to offer the vadai malai to the deity after that, which she did.

The second time was during the time my late wife was sick. I prayed to Lord Venkateshwara, who is our Ishta Deivatha of my grand father. But the prayer was not answered. By this time, one must say that I have grown up spiritually and knew that I can not bribe Him. But bribe I did, knowing full well that it was wrong, because my mind and heart were trying to grasp at anything that my religion could offer me. I admit I was not strong and as a human being needed the support of my faith.

So, today, I can not be harsh on those who try to 'bribe' our Gods. People who do are either desperate or not spiritually mature. In both cases, I am glad that our faith allows us to do so.

Just my two cents.

Regards,
KRS

 

[sangom]

Sarva Shri. Sangom and Nara,

Your discussions regarding GOD and Bhakthi movement takes the focus away from the point of discussion here Viz. Are we trying to Bribe GOD?

Shri Nacchinarkiniyan,

This thread as titled now, can have only two answers, yes or no; probably you might get some sort of "yes & no" as well. So, my request is, instead of this thread becoming a detailed opinion poll sort of thing, will it not be permissible to allow related discussions like what is the concept about god, how and when the bribing (as you put it) might have commnenced, etc.? In case your answer is a firm NO, I will shift my post elsewhere.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Shri Nacchinarkiniyan,

This thread as titled now, can have only two answers, yes or no; probably you might get some sort of "yes & no" as well. So, my request is, instead of this thread becoming a detailed opinion poll sort of thing, will it not be permissible to allow related discussions like what is the concept about god, how and when the bribing (as you put it) might have commnenced, etc.? In case your answer is a firm NO, I will shift my post elsewhere.

Thank you, Sangom.

The idea behind this thread is to make the people who make Venduthal to have a fresh look at the practice. It is not a opinion poll. The number of members who view any of the threads here is far higher than the number of people who respond.

Keeping that in mind your posts relating to GOD and the history of the practice is a digression. It would take away the emphasis on stopping/curbing the practice.

 

[B Suresh Kumar]

The comparison between the offer to god and bribing is two different aspects.
The bribing is done to officials / politicians to overlook the set out procedures and to break the queue.
The politicians / officials misuse their official capacity for enriching themselves with illgotten wealth and people who want to break the queue or have some sort of irregularity bribe them. Those giving bribe or accepting are sacrificing the interest of the society and for them bribe is a routine affair.
Whereas offer to god is voluntary and no bribe is involved. GOD is not misusing his official capacity and sacrificing the interest of others. it is form of thanks giving which can be in any form.
Many students after passing the exams give sweets / gifts to the teachers which is nothing but sharing of happiness and cannot be construed as bribe whereas if the students takes tuition or does some personal work of the teacher just to get good marks is bribing.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Semantics will not get us anywhere.

The offer to GOD is conditional on his giving you something. If the wish is not fulfilled, the offer is cancelled. So the offer is conditional. It is a BRIBE.

Many students after passing the exams give sweets / gifts to the teachers which is nothing but sharing of happiness and cannot be construed as bribe whereas if the students takes tuition or does some personal work of the teacher just to get good marks is bribing.

This is Thanksgiving. It can not be compared to your conditional offer which is a BRIBE.

 

[CLN]

B Suresh Kumar: Whereas offer to god is voluntary and no bribe is involved. GOD is not misusing his official capacity and sacrificing the interest of others. it is form of thanks giving which can be in any form.

Supposing I attend a job interview along with, say, nine other people for a lone post. Assuming that the interview is conducted impartially and there is no interference in the selection process, the best among the ten who attended the interview will be chosen. if I happen to be the best of the lot I will be selected; other wise not. The question now is: Am I ready to wait and watch? If I decide to pray now to my Ishta devata assuring that I will do this or that, if I get selected for the job, is it birbe or not? I feel it certainly is!

 

[Nara]

Supposing I attend a job interview along with, say, nine other people for a lone post. Assuming that the interview is conducted impartially and there is no interference in the selection process, the best among the ten who attended the interview will be chosen. if I happen to be the best of the lot I will be selected; other wise not. The question now is: Am I ready to wait and watch? If I decide to pray now to my Ishta devata assuring that I will do this or that, if I get selected for the job, is it birbe or not? I feel it certainly is!

Dear CLN sir, this analogy is not working for me . For starters, it assumes the interviewers are capable of fretting out the best candidate from the 10. Even so, this person does not know whether he is that best candidate. What if he prays that he is that best candidate?

The next conundrum is whether there was a quid pro quo or not. Let us say he prays that he will shave his head if he is that best candidate, and suppose that he gets selected. Now, he can try to fulfill his pledge, or not.

Suppose that he ignores his pledge feeling shy to shave his head off. There are two possibilities at this point:

• nothing happens -- then this individual may think (a) the whole god and prayer thing is a hoax, and therefore there was no bribe, or (b) god has no enforcement mechanism -- in which case was it a bribe to begin with?
• the person gets fired -- then, would that mean god is no different from a clerk in Rippon building, visiting retribution upon this guy, who was selected because he was the best, not because of his prayer?

Next, suppose that the person fulfills his pledge and shaves his head. Here again there are two possibilities:

• he continues in his job, everything is dandy, no harm, no foul (after all he was the best candidate anyway), the person happily continues to be devoted to god, is this not what god wants?
• he gets fired, and this is a problem, now this fellow may reject god for having reneged on his end of the bargain, or he may think somehow he fell short in fulfilling the pledge -- shame on god to let him think that way as he would have been selected anyway even if he had not prayed.

Let us now consider one more possibility, he fails to fulfill his pledge after getting the job thinking it was wrong of him to have attempted to bribe god in the first place. Would that be alright?

Bribe, or thanksgiving, not only great religious leaders like Adi Sankara and Ramanuja, but the very Iswara himself in BG has stated that even such "bribe" based bhakti is alright, for it proves to the individual that Bhakti works, and sets him out on the path of devotion to god.

I feel the very idea of prayer and worship promotes a kind of dependency mind-set, which leads to belief in all kinds of superstitions. It is best to raise our children free of religious dogma and indoctrination. It is best to expose them to all kinds of ideas in as much a value-neutral way as possible and let them make up their own mind in due course of time. Let us teach them how to think, not what to think. I am sure this is too radical an idea for those for whom tradition is invaluably inerrant.

Cheers!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Bribe is not Thanksgiving. It is not prayer. But the offer of something in return. In fact it is often seen that many of the people who do this kind of Venduthal do not pray. Venduthal is not Bhakthi. My first post was very clear.

Again this discussion is for people who believe in GOD and pray.

So Mr. Nara please post your rationalist point of view in some other discussion. Thank You.

 

[Nara]

....The second time was during the time my late wife was sick. I prayed to Lord Venkateshwara, who is our Ishta Deivatha of my grand father.

I feel this is an important point that must be taken into account. If one believes in god, and if he/she is in trouble, real trouble, the world seems to be closing in on him/her, ready to clutch even a twig, offers to do something if only the dark clouds just moves on, what is wrong with that, given the individual is a believer to begin with?

When everything is fine, good health, wealth, happiness abound, a bhakta can be confident that he/she will never strike a bargain with god. But how he/she will react when times are bad, who can tell? Even when you strike no bargain with god, but pray to him, there is an implicit bargain of the kind -- please let me have a peaceful life, like what Periyazhvar says in the 10th Thirumozhi of 4th Decad.

அப்போதைக்கிப்போதே சொல்லிவைத்தேன், அரங்கத்தரவணைப் பள்ளியானே!!
(I am praying to you now itself, for the bad times that is sure to come in the future.)
​

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

....

So Mr. Nara please post your rationalist point of view in some other discussion. Thank You.

Sorry Mr. Nacchinarkiniyan, this is a discussion about trying to bribe god. I have a POV and I would like to express it in as civil a way as I can. Let me gently remind you sir, where to post and what to post is my decision, and to allow it or not is that of the moderator.

Cheers!

 

[B Suresh Kumar]

Dear ClN sir,
I beg to differ from you.
If all the ten pray together GOD can answer the prayer of only one. does it mean that God is partial to one and impartial to others. I dont think so. All the ten will also be aware that only one of them will be successful. the person who gets thanks GOD

 

[B Suresh Kumar]

Bribe is not Thanksgiving. It is not prayer. But the offer of something in return. In fact it is often seen that many of the people who do this kind of Venduthal do not pray. Venduthal is not Bhakthi. My first post was very clear.



Bribery, a form of corruption, is an act implying money or gift given that alters the behavior of the recipient. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty.
The bribe is the gift bestowed to influence the recipient's conduct. It may be any money, good, right in action, property, preferment, privilege, emolument, object of value, advantage, or merely a promise or undertaking to induce or influence the action, vote, or influence of a person in an official or public capacity.


From the above definition of Bribery I dont think that GOD is holding any official or public capacity and he may not influence the decision making process

 

[nachi naga]

bribe can also be termed as 'anbalippu',which is a positive way of acknowledgement.or madras bashai 'something' ayya.a token of love or appreciation.when a person realises god is all that exists,within and outside of you,who is giving anbalippu to whom or bribe to whom?

 

[CLN]

B Suresh Kumar: From the above definition of Bribery I dont think that GOD is holding any official or public capacity and he may not influence the decision making process

Shri Suresh Kumar ji,

The definition you have cited is that of an individual, however high he might be in stature, from a purely legal angle. Obviously, God does not fall within his purview and his definition will not apply to this particular thread in which we are talking about various aspects and ramifications concerning "bribing God". So, based on a particular definition which does not apply to God at all, to say offerings assured to God cannot be termed 'bribe' is a case of 'begging the question' in Logic.

Further, as Shri Nachinarkiniyan has pointed out in post #15, "semantics" does not help. All of us who are expressing different views in this thread are clear about what we mean by 'bribe' to God or anybody and so dictionary definitions are not going to be of much help here.

What we are examining in this thread is NOT exactly whether God is bribeable or He takes bribe or not, but whether what we do through means of various forms of "offers", like Paada yaathrai, angapradakshinam, offering sathir thengai, padayal, vadamalai, carrying out some special pooja, thirukkalyanam, kaavadi eduthal, cash offer in Hundi and other similar things to God as a quid pro quo measure is 'trying' to bribe God or not. The word 'trying' itself shifts the emphasis on the intention of the 'offerer' rather than the 'receiver'. So, your reply posts #21 and 22 do not answer the point I have raised in post #16.

 

[kunjuppu]

something to consider: doing penance just for the sake of it. ie climbing up the hills of thirupathi on foot.