• 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.

What I think idol workship is

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am 29 yrs old, I have trying to understand Idol Worship. The fact is trying to understand religion/Hinduism and God. Anyways I want to share my thoughts.

I know our ancestors are very intelligent Technology Of Spirituality Full - YouTube

Why did they introduce idol worship?

My understanding of this;
In meditation they say meditating with help of a object or sound is very primitive, but you start your meditation practice there and go to higher levels. So Hindu religion has done the same thing, they want everybody to start with idol worship and go to high levels of religion. Its like a stick for the kid who is learning to walk. The basis is we should be able to see God in an idol, though our eyes says that its a stone/wood/metal, we need to mediate and take control of the mind to see God.
The next stage we should be able to see God in anything. At this stage there isn't a need for idol because you see God in anything and everything.

But lot of people still hold on to their sticks and deny to come to higher levels. May be they are happy at this stage of Religion.

Post your comments

Thiruvenkadam
 
"Those who have taken shelter of the lotus feet of a sad-guru
and received diksa from him realise that Sri Bhagavan is the
Supreme Lord and everyone’s worshipable Deity. Amongst the
sixty-four limbs of bhakti, the nine-fold limbs of devotion (navadhäbhakti)
and the five-fold limbs of devotion (pancäìga-bhakti),
devotion constantly accompanied by the performance of kirtana
(kirrtanäkhyä-bhakti) is described as being the topmost. Yadyapy
anyä-bhaktiù kalau kartavyä, tadä kértanäkhyä bhakti-samyogenaiva
this statement shows the supremacy of kértanäkhyä-bhakti in the
age of Kali. Still, in order to remove the weakness of heart and
mundane conceptions of a kanistha-adhikäri, or neophyte devotee,
who is initiated into the visnu-mantra, arcana is specifically
required.
The consciousness of the conditioned soul is very flickering
and similar to that of an ignorant child. Only by the mercy of
the äcärya does he develop a reverential attitude towards the
transcendental Deity and become fortunate to receive instruction
on the worship of Sri Visnu, who is non-dual, or one without a
second (advaya). Those who are adverse to service to Sri Hari
disregard the path of arcana and instead engage in the activities
of karma and the cultivation of jñana. On the other hand, those
who perform arcana according to the rules of päncarätrika know
bhakti-yoga to be the topmost. Impurity exists in any endeavour
devoid of the worship of Sri Bhagavän. In the absence of a
proper relationship with Bhagavän, one tends to worship many
demigods. In such consciousness, one cannot properly perform
the arcana of Sri Hari.
Those attached to household life have
envious natures and agitated minds. Due to this, they become
entangled in various types of imaginary paths and disrespect the
arcana process. When the jiva becomes free from the influence of
his material ego and accepts his eternal occupation of servitude,
then his worshipable Sri Bhagavän manifests before him in the
form of a Deity to accept his service. Yena janma-çataiù pürvaà
väsudevaù samarcitaù, tan-mukhe hari-nämäni sadä tiñöhanti bhärata.
The exalted devotees of Sri Bhagavän have commented on this
verse as follows: To achieve the eligibility to genuinely enter
näma-bhajana, the jiva must first be elevated from the kanistha adhikäri
stage to the madhyama-adhikäri stage by rendering
service to the Deity form of Bhagavän (arcävatära). The process
of Deity worship has been mentioned in both the Pancarätra and
the Bhägavatam. Therefore, the Supreme Personality of Godhead
Sri Caitanya Mahäprabhu has said:
krsna-mantra haite habe saàsära-mocana
krsna-näma haite päbe kåñëera caraëa
Çré Caitanya-caritämåta (ädi-lélä 7.73)
One can obtain freedom from material existence simply by
chanting the krsna-mantra. Indeed, by chanting krsna-näma
one obtains Krsna’s lotus feet.
As long as a devotee remains a kanistha-adhikäri, he
cannot realise the supramundane or transcendental position
of Bhagavän’s eternal devotees. By faithfully worshiping the
Deity of Väsudeva [ÇSri Krisna] with the help of various items,
he gradually realises the intrinsic nature of the transcendental
name and mantra, which consequently diminishes his mundane
conceptions. Apart from the arcä-vigraha, the Deity of Bhagavän,
the jéva maintains an intense enjoying tendency towards all
other perceivable objects. Therefore, in order to enhance his
8 reverential attitude towards Sri Bhagavän, the neophyte devotee
is recommended to perform all of his endeavours for Bhagavän’s
pleasure while simultaneously completely renouncing other
activities. While performing arcana, one must focus his attention
on the arcä-vigraha and the process of arcana itself. By advancing
in the process of arcana, one enters into the realm of bhajana
(spontaneous devotional meditation). Although the process of
arcana is not the priority in bhajana, still, bhajana is not opposed
to the reverential service attitude required for arcana. In fact, the
arcä-vigraha is a special incarnation of Bhagavän. Bhagavän’s
incarnations appear in this world at certain times, but both the
Supersoul and the arcä-vigraha can be realised at all times by the
process of loving devotional service.

By performing arcana of Bhagavän, one soon feels immense
pleasure within oneself, which is the cause of all varieties of
perfections and auspiciousness. Without performing arcana, it is
not possible for a person attached to material enjoyment to break
free from bad association and so forth. Sri Bhagavän Himself
instructs us on the process of His arcana through the guidelines
given in the sastras. Moreover, great sages like Brahmä, Siva,
Närada, Vyäsa, and others have recommended this process as the
most beneficial for the supreme welfare of all individuals situated
within the varna ashrama system, including women and südras.
Arcana is classified under three categories – vaidika, or that
which is prescribed in Vedas, the täntrika, or that which is taught
in the Tantras, and misra, or mixed. The altar or sacrificial arena,
fire, the sun, water, and the heart are either places of arcana or
objects of arcana. The Deity can be of eight kinds: carved from
stone, carved from wood, made of clay, paint, sand, jewels, gold
or other alloys, or mentally conceived. Furthermore, the Deity
can also be either moveable or stationary. Bathing the Deity
with mantras, worshipping the Deity at the different sandhyäs
(intervals), cleansing the Deity, changing the Deity’s clothes and
decorating the Deity with ornaments, sprinkling purified water
on the different instruments and ingredients employed in arcana,
offering pädya (ingredients used for bathing the Deity’s feet),
arghya-äcamaniya (ingredients used for washing the mouth),
incense, scents, a lamp, flowers, food, worshipping the Deity’s
eternal devotees in the guru-paramparä, chanting the müla-mantra,
the recitation of hymns, offering prostrated obeisances, reciting
prayers and honouring the garlands, candana (sandalwood
paste), flowers, and other items offered to the Deity are limbs of
arcana. Constructing a temple for the proper installation of the
Deity, organizing processions, and observing festivals related to
the Deity are also integral limbs of arcana. Thus, by performing
arcana unto Sri Hari with single-minded pure devotion (bhaktiyoga),
one attains loving devotional service to His lotus feet.
Being a special avatära of Bhagavän, the Deity captivates the
faith of the arcaka, the devotee who performs arcana, and bestows
auspiciousness upon him. Those who consider the arcä-vigraha
to be composed of certain structural ingredients and maintain
an enjoying mentality towards Him have no faith in Bhagavän
Çré Viñëu. If anyone considers Bhagavän to be an object of his
enjoyment and pretentiously engages in arcana, then certainly
he possesses either very weak faith or no faith at all. With great
faith one should perform the worship of the Deity of Bhagavän
with sixteen varieties of paraphernalia. Sincere household
devotees should worship Sri Bhagavän with the best ingredients.
The uttama-adhikäris or premi-bhaktas, those who have develope
great love for Bhagavän, are beyond the rules and regulations of
varna ashrama. Being immersed in their mood of intense devotion,
they perform worship endowed with ecstatic emotions (bhävasevä),
with easily attainable ingredients. On the other hand,
wealthy household-devotees should worship the Deity with
the best ingredients and observe various devotional festivals
according to their capacity. Behaving in a miserly fashion in this
regard makes one wicked, and consequently his service-attitude
begins to deteriorate.
It is stated in the Çré Hari-bhakti-viläsa:
kåtyänyetäni tu präyo gåhiëäà dhanäni satäm
likhitäni na tu tyakta-parigraha-mahätmanäm
Mentioned herein are obligatory duties concerning the
process of arcana which are recommended for wealthy,
virtuous householders. They do not pertain to fully
renounced sages."
 
I am 29 yrs old, I have trying to understand Idol Worship. The fact is trying to understand religion/Hinduism and God. Anyways I want to share my thoughts.

I know our ancestors are very intelligent Technology Of Spirituality Full - YouTube

Why did they introduce idol worship?

My understanding of this;
In meditation they say meditating with help of a object or sound is very primitive, but you start your meditation practice there and go to higher levels. So Hindu religion has done the same thing, they want everybody to start with idol worship and go to high levels of religion. Its like a stick for the kid who is learning to walk. The basis is we should be able to see God in an idol, though our eyes says that its a stone/wood/metal, we need to mediate and take control of the mind to see God.
The next stage we should be able to see God in anything. At this stage there isn't a need for idol because you see God in anything and everything.

But lot of people still hold on to their sticks and deny to come to higher levels. May be they are happy at this stage of Religion.

Post your comments

Thiruvenkadam


We have to realize that keeping the mind still is actually one of the most difficult thing to do.
Its almost impossible sometimes.
Ok just picture this..to focus on anything we need to have mental impression in our mind.
Note I am using the word mental impression and not mental image cos image is only possible in a sighted individual.
Those who are visually challenged(i dont like using the word Blind) have auditory and tactile impressions forming in their brain.So for them its either hearing the sermons/prayers or feeling an idol to concentrate and after a while they will be able to focus without touching or hearing too.

Some religions claim that they dont have idol worship but many fail to realize that idol need not always mean a solid object with attributes and even facing a direction during prayer and thinking of holy scripts itself is a form of idol worship.

Concentration is of utmost importance in any endeavor and idol worship trains the mind to focus.But we also have to realize that we face the idol for a split second only.cos the moment we are in front of it we close our eyes to focus within.


Even I have thought about the need of Idol worship before and i dont really pray with an idol cos i prefer praying in an open space where i can see the sky.So nature is my "idol".

What I like about Hinduism is its very user friendly and caters to the need of the devotee.Each one method of prayer is accepted and there is not really "this way is superior to any other way"
This thought of evolving and going beyond idol worship does come to many of us too but the moment you think that i feel we are also not realizing that God is also in the idol as He is everywhere.

So the best is to chose whats the best for us and progress will be natural and never judge anyones mode of prayer too.

Good topic you brought up..keep posting.
 
from elementary level of worship to meta-physical level of prayers is sanathana dharma .parent religion of all religions which exist today is sd,sometimes the children religion deny the parent religion but heart of heart all religion speak teach same principle to love god and his creation in all its splendor.we all are children of god and to god we go back.
 
I am 29 yrs old, I have trying to understand Idol Worship. The fact is trying to understand religion/Hinduism and God. Anyways I want to share my thoughts.

I know our ancestors are very intelligent Technology Of Spirituality Full - YouTube

Why did they introduce idol worship?

My understanding of this;
In meditation they say meditating with help of a object or sound is very primitive, but you start your meditation practice there and go to higher levels. So Hindu religion has done the same thing, they want everybody to start with idol worship and go to high levels of religion. Its like a stick for the kid who is learning to walk. The basis is we should be able to see God in an idol, though our eyes says that its a stone/wood/metal, we need to mediate and take control of the mind to see God.
The next stage we should be able to see God in anything. At this stage there isn't a need for idol because you see God in anything and everything.

But lot of people still hold on to their sticks and deny to come to higher levels. May be they are happy at this stage of Religion.

Post your comments

Thiruvenkadam

Shri Thiruvenkadam,

It is not correct to say that Hinduism starts with idol worship and all that. The earliest hindu scripture viz., the Rigveda does not mention about any idolatry, nor do the other two vedas yajur and saama. Fire was the only thing revered and it was the medium of contact with all other divinities.

Idolatry is a later addition to Hinduism or Sanatanadharma. Researchers/scholars have different views on how and when idolatry entered hinduism. I subscribe to the view that when the original tribal people who were already settled in different parts of Bharat, and absorbed the divinities worshipped and revered by those various tribal groups and those totems gradually became idols for worship within hindu religion. In order to facilitate such "absorption", some specific "puranas" were also composed. In the course of history very many forms got into the hindu scheme of worship and the hindu pantheon in this way. Some might have gone out also. In our own times we find cases of divinities of the lower castes/classes getting upgraded to one form of Devi, Lakshmi, Vishnu or Siva and being embraced by the higher classes also.

Hence there is no great substance in saying that "hindu religion wants us to start with idol worship and go to high levels of religion", etc. These are all hagiological justifications.

It may be more truthful to say that the Hindu religion serves a buffet of religious options and one can choose whichever one likes, including atheism and follow it. As regards going to "higher" levels etc., it is a matter of one's imagination, belief and auto-suggestion, imo.
 
I personally feel that for some of us Sakara (with form) Brahman is the only way we can pray and worship easily. It is extremely difficult to worship nothing/nirakara. Takes years of practise and for some never, at least in this lifetime. Therefore worshipping idols that we can see, touch, imagine, hold is very helpful.

We are indeed very lucky that our religion allows us to choose whatever way in which we feel most comfortable to worship as others have said.

Speaking of Brahman I have a question if i may. If Brahman is nirguna and nirakara how is it that he is described as "real", "eternal", "absolute"? Aren't these attributes as well?
 
"
Speaking of Brahman I have a question if i may. If Brahman is nirguna and nirakara how is it that he is described as "real", "eternal", "absolute"? Aren't these attributes as well?

Sow. Amala,

A profound question according to me. But do you think it is necessary that something which has no shape (aakaara) per se and no gunas like satva, rajas or thamas, cannot be real? What about space? What about the zeros and ones in the computer world which underlies the digital world itself - do these pulses have shape or gunas of their own? To me it appears that they don't have; you may know better.

In truth Sankara's brahman and the "sunya" of the Madhyamika Buddhists are one and the same. At the root of absolute Reality or Truth there is really nothing, that is what both try to convey; Sankara being a tactician puts the sunyata or nothingness as something which has no quality at all. The subtle difference is in the presentation; one says "there is no meals today", while the other says "for today's meals there will be no item!"

Ruminating on these points led me to think that probably those thinkers wanted to convey the idea of something like a universal gravitation Field (which is no longer current theory I suppose) or like the space-time continuum, as the ultimate realization. Since the point at issue was human life and its purpose etc., it appears to me that a hypothesis of a Universal Life Field (ULF) may be able to supplant the idea of Nirguna Brahman. Of course this ULF will not be the Supreme God who is the creator of the universe but once it is accepted that the feeling or cognition of this universe through our sense organs is only a limited experience caused by our being alive, we may be able to appreciate what Advaita sought to put forward through the ideas of Adhyaasa, Adhyaaropa, Maayaa etc. The universe seems to exist and behave in certain ways because the ULF works through our body and sense organs to create that sort of a feeling; take away the ULF from the body and probably what we may see and experience (if there is an existence after death, I don't know) may be very different.

But the difference that I have with religion is that whereas religion lays down this sort of realization as the end-all of human life and calls it as moksha, liberation, etc., to me these do not appeal. Hence my agnosticism.
 
Last edited:
I personally feel that for some of us Sakara (with form) Brahman is the only way we can pray and worship easily. It is extremely difficult to worship nothing/nirakara. Takes years of practise and for some never, at least in this lifetime. Therefore worshipping idols that we can see, touch, imagine, hold is very helpful.

We are indeed very lucky that our religion allows us to choose whatever way in which we feel most comfortable to worship as others have said.

Speaking of Brahman I have a question if i may. If Brahman is nirguna and nirakara how is it that he is described as "real", "eternal", "absolute"? Aren't these attributes as well?

nirgunam says it all amala.its the samskritham word play i guess. :)
 
Thank you Sangom mama. You're right about space being attributeless but real. I'm not sure that Adavitins would like Brahman compared to the sunya of Buddhists. Basically trying to understand Advaita for me is like going round in circles. It also seems alot like the Emperor and his new clothes story. Whereby one person starts praising the emperor's new clothes and everyone starts praising and beleiving it even tho they cannot see it. Then a little boy announces that the Emperor is actually not wearing anything!
 
Last edited:
"The mind follows matter,
and whatever it thinks of is also material. We may say that brahma
is all-pervading, but how can our minds actually conceive of this?
We will be forced to think of it in terms of the all-pervasiveness
of the sky. How can the mind go beyond this consideration? Our
conception of brahma is therefore constrained by the limitation
of material space.

If one says, “I am meditating on brahma,” the experience of
brahma will be limited by material time, for it fades when one’s
meditation is concluded. How can the mind’s meditation grasp
an object that is above matter when it is conditioned by time
and space, which are material phenomena? One may reject the
idea that the form of the Deity can consist of material elements
such as earth and water, and one can imagine that Isvara is
situated in the directions or space, but still, this is all bhuta-puja,
the worship of matter.

No material object can support one’s attainment of the
transcendental goal. The only thing that facilitates this is the
awakening of the inclination towards Isvara. This inclination is
inherent within the jivatma, and is gradually strengthened and
converted into bhakti when one utters the name of God, recites
His pastimes, and receives inspiration from beholding the Deity
(sri vigraha). The Lord’s spiritual form can be experienced only
by pure bhakti, not by jñana and karma."
 
Idol worship came into existence because, When the yugas passes by people's attachment towards god and their ability to realise the brahman deteriorate at a pace. When people were not able to ralize the self, Some rishis sadhus who were experts in yogas wanted to instill confidence and self belief in people. They designed some idols and now we are worshipping them. If you believe god is with you and the belief is what here got a shape as idol.
you can worship anything as God till you believe in it that it has the powers to suffice your wantings.
 
hindus have om symbol,christians have cross symbol.islam has crescent moon ...etc basically iconic.an object is a elementary stage and one finally gradutaes to advaitham as ultimate.just like kg class to phd class,a step by step primer of worship or prayers.god is one religions are many.sun is one rays are many.
 
an object is a elementary stage and one finally gradutaes to advaitham as ultimate.just like kg class to phd class,a step by step primer of worship or prayers.

This is exactly what we follow, we learnt our logic by route, and we became academicians for survival, rather than to develop our logic/reason to grow. I would say, we didn't understand the object/logic in the first place.

an object is a elementary stage and one finally gradutaes to advaitham as ultimate.just like kg class to phd class,a step by step primer of worship or prayers.

Advaitham means one only or oneness, shouldn't that exist always? How did it become the ultimate when I graduated? Then, didn't it exist when I was in elementary stage? If so, it cannot be advaitham.

Plus, what are you referring to Advaitham here?
 
If you believe god is with you and the belief is what here got a shape as idol. you can worship anything as God till you believe in it that it has the powers to suffice your wantings.

You are contradicting, you said Rishis were realized, now the belief got a shape as idol. Were idols/icons, the beliefs or art-designs of Rishis or they obtained divine revelations from the gods themselves?
 
Fire was the only thing revered and it was the medium of contact with all other divinities.
Idolatry is a later addition to Hinduism or Sanatanadharma.


If 'medium of contact' means the divinities were perceived, how is personifying them as icons/idols or any forms, is idolatry? This seems conflicting.

This is like saying, I eat fresh sugar, using it for the next time defiles the form or nature of sugar. We got to extract fresh sugar from cane everytime, extracting it once and using it for long, would be idolatry. So, it is like suggesting, one has to do yagna every time to obtain divine revelation and for performing daily obeisances.

The next stage we should be able to see God in anything. At this stage there isn't a need for idol because you see God in anything and everything.
Thiruvenkadam

Being conscious of other things other the divine form of the Lord (as revealed in yagnas) is Idolatry, which is what we have been doing. Those perceiving His form in as many ways is best at occupying the mind in related knowledge than meditating on unknown (formless) object and getting lost. [anyway, the latter don't even exist]. UpAsana is meditating on His form.

You got the very first stage itself wrong, you are taking steps down to the garage .

'yath thE rUpam kalyANatham tath thE pashyAmi, vYuha rashmin samUha thEjaha
-IsavAsya Upanishad-16

'Your form is auspicious(kalyANam) that I shall behold, so remove/gather away the dazzling rays(tejas).'
 
Last edited:
An idol is a symbol of something deeper that can not be explained.
A colored piece of cloth is a rag, but a piece of cloth with specific color pattern becomes a flag, and we give reverence to it as if it is the country. Is flag the country- no it is a symbol of the country.
 
An idol is a symbol of something deeper that can not be explained.
A colored piece of cloth is a rag, but a piece of cloth with specific color pattern becomes a flag, and we give reverence to it as if it is the country. Is flag the country- no it is a symbol of the country.

Shri rajprasad,

The saying goes that "comparisons are, at times atleast, odious and the above is one such.

In the case of the national flag it is a common decision (at least constructively by a majority of their elected representatives) that a piece of cloth with certain specifications will be deemed to be the national flag and duly respected as such. But in the case of an idol where is such consensus? Most probably such a consensus was there among the people who introduced and marketed it through the well-known methods of religion but for the rest of the populace it is only imposition and indoctrination ending up as complete brainwashing. If these idols had any deeper meaning or powers invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni would not have been able to ransack Somnath and use the stone idol as step for a masjid, would he?
 
Shri rajprasad,

The saying goes that "comparisons are, at times atleast, odious and the above is one such.

In the case of the national flag it is a common decision (at least constructively by a majority of their elected representatives) that a piece of cloth with certain specifications will be deemed to be the national flag and duly respected as such. But in the case of an idol where is such consensus? Most probably such a consensus was there among the people who introduced and marketed it through the well-known methods of religion but for the rest of the populace it is only imposition and indoctrination ending up as complete brainwashing. If these idols had any deeper meaning or powers invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni would not have been able to ransack Somnath and use the stone idol as step for a masjid, would he?

In my post I never implied that Idol is the God. Idols are representation of something that people want to show respect, no one of us should destroy someone else's dream.
 
In my post I never implied that Idol is the God. Idols are representation of something that people want to show respect, no one of us should destroy someone else's dream.

Shri rajprasad,

Again, I beg to differ. The Islamic terrorists also do have their dream - of islamization of the whole world - and towards fulfilment of that dream they indulge in their destructive actions. Will you say "no one of us should destroy their dream"? I presume you will not support it.

In a similar way people build their dreams based on idols and it goes to benefit temple priests and temple administrators both of whom are usually unscrupulous. Though this does not have sudden destructive result like a terrorist's bomb, the "Temple culture" has decayed and has been degraded so much that it has become anti-social, e.g., the Ayyappa crowd. I feel such a culture therefore deserves to be discouraged. By doing so, we are not destroying someone's dream, but only preventing from becoming a social nuisance because of the dreams.
 
In a similar way people build their dreams based on idols and it goes to benefit temple priests and temple administrators both of whom are usually unscrupulous. Though this does not have sudden destructive result like a terrorist's bomb, the "Temple culture" has decayed and has been degraded so much that it has become anti-social, e.g., the Ayyappa crowd. I feel such a culture therefore deserves to be discouraged. By doing so, we are not destroying someone's dream, but only preventing from becoming a social nuisance because of the dreams.

Oh my god, I go to temple in town everyday, have I become an anti-social? I have a diety at home, have I become an anti-social? I never knew preists are usually unscrupulous. The preist of the temple nearby lives in a single room rented house with Rs.1500 monthly income, though he never shows up his poverty outside and never compromises on his services to temple diety, did the temple culture benefit him? 95% of preists I know are below poverty line, rest of them middle class, I think I'm probably an anti-social. I get peace of mind spending time in temple and praying to diety with belief, am I an anti-social and is that preist getting personal benefits out of my ignorance? or may be I am stupid for worshiping an 'idol'. What other temple going apart from ayyappa crowd is anti-social? so if all temples are closed, will it reduce the anti-socials?
Isn't this post against the forum rules that states not to hurt religious sentiments and to respect other's practices. Clearly this post is not just coveying personal thoughts, its a mischievous anti-hindu statement, irrespective of whoever it comes from.
 
Well said, sir. Hope the lessons sink in; tolerance for others is not a virtue of communism!


Oh my god, I go to temple in town everyday, have I become an anti-social? I have a diety at home, have I become an anti-social? I never knew preists are usually unscrupulous. The preist of the temple nearby lives in a single room rented house with Rs.1500 monthly income, though he never shows up his poverty outside and never compromises on his services to temple diety, did the temple culture benefit him? 95% of preists I know are below poverty line, rest of them middle class, I think I'm probably an anti-social. I get peace of mind spending time in temple and praying to diety with belief, am I an anti-social and is that preist getting personal benefits out of my ignorance? or may be I am stupid for worshiping an 'idol'. What other temple going apart from ayyappa crowd is anti-social? so if all temples are closed, will it reduce the anti-socials?
Isn't this post against the forum rules that states not to hurt religious sentiments and to respect other's practices. Clearly this post is not just coveying personal thoughts, its a mischievous anti-hindu statement, irrespective of whoever it comes from.
 
I personally feel that for some of us Sakara (with form) Brahman is the only way we can pray and worship easily. It is extremely difficult to worship nothing/nirakara. Takes years of practise and for some never, at least in this lifetime. Therefore worshipping idols that we can see, touch, imagine, hold is very helpful.

We are indeed very lucky that our religion allows us to choose whatever way in which we feel most comfortable to worship as others have said.

Speaking of Brahman I have a question if i may. If Brahman is nirguna and nirakara how is it that he is described as "real", "eternal", "absolute"? Aren't these attributes as well?

Very intelligent question. How do you define infinity?. We can define with what we know and then expect the reader to extrapolate. So with our limited means we can describe Brahman to an extent.
Let us assume that Brahman is sutler than space. Is there a place without space? How do you define space? everything we know exists in space.
Let us assume that Brahman is sutler than energy. Can you describe energy? We can see its manifestation as light, heat, and sound.
When we say Brahman is satyam, the translation truth but it does not do justice. Satyam here means eternal truth, that which does not change in time or space.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top