God in Vedas and Upanishads

Re: # 50

Let see what do you mean when you write, for example when you wrote

``Section (a) - The conceptions of God are distinctly different in Vedas and Upanishads but they are NOT mutually exclusive, rather the Upanishadic thought is a developmental culmination of the Vedas` tentative surmises. ``

what does this mean, give us an example.

Or is it the reason 2% of hinuds are interested in their scripture.

What is developmental culmination of the Vedas ``tentative surmises``??

What is developmental culmination?

What is tentative surmises?

All I can understand is ``your english vocablury and spelling are better``

Re: # 46

You are right Beleif in one God and life after death is ``the fundamantal`` which makes all the difference.

In Islam, you can base your though totally in Quran, which does not need any outside help. What we beleif as Quran says that God send his messengers to all the nations and to all continents, and he still communicates with his humans. So Kirshan, Buddaha were all prophets of God, they brought fresh water to this world; unfortunately people who did commentry on their message (upnashids, etc) could not keep the ``essence of message``, due to this thier books got corrupted. God send his fianal compelte message with the promisse that it will be preserved upto end of times. Same message which was given in initial form by Kirshan and Buddha.

Kirshna said in Gita ``What would you do if a stream of fresh water appears outside of your village, would you still drink from the old pond``, think about it. Still there is truth, here and there, even if the original scriptures has been lost.

Re: # 46

One God: Eik Shriwar is actually a prophecy of Quran, the very first revelation of Quran is

Read! and thy Lord is the Most exalted;

This prophecy is being fullfilled, Christiens has started saying we say trinity just for explanation but really there is only One God, so does the Hinduism, this is indirct influence of Islam. So as reading will spread so does the concept of one God, as God willed thousand of years ago. You have taken first step toward truth.

Re: # 45

Can you present a proof that if Bhagwad Gita give this idea of live matter or dead matter?

See, one objection against Hinuds is this ``Now in this modern world, if hindu scripture are read as originally written then they appear hollow and devoid of wisdom and filled with comical ideas, due to this Hindu friends try to put new cover on the book, to do so they put forward new commentries which will squeeze enlightened ideas as Humanity has learned now into those old books``

Re: # 45

Sunjay you tried to give it a little twist, as you wrote.

``You contention is that looking into the numerical strength of animal kingdom, the numerical strength of humans should be astronomically high. ``

The actual contention is ``Karma is a failed ideology to explain salvation of humans, becasue with little faults humans are being turned into sects and other form, then 1) from where new humans are coming from 2) when all the humans will be eventually converted into sects then this process will start over again? 3) If it starts over again then God as presented by Karam is unfair God.

Re: # 42

As a matter of fact, Islam and Quran directly deal with this main subject, what is the purpose of life, mean to attain it and why God created humans. Quran is full of this subject, i fear you would not have the patience to listen and think about it with an open mind. But anyway, I will just quote one brief reference; where as Quran describes this important matter in detail.

[18:8] Verily, We have made all that is on the earth an ornament for it, that We may try them as to which of them is the best in conduct.

Re: # 35, Rizwan:
Since you have the largest number and length of comments:

Evidently you have presented an article possibly written by you as a comment. I have not read it yet because it is present in a very inconvenient format. Could you post it as a link so that one can print it out in a decent format? Glancing at it broadly, it seems to be very interesting. Particularly, because you are an Ahemadi. Thanks for it.

To All:

1. I am sorry that I could not interact in the initial stage of comments accretion. Partly, this was because I had submitted the article in the middle of May and Chowk published it on June 1. Just before that time I became very busy and I am now getting back.

2. Thanks to all the commenters and I intend to review their contributions and respond suitably to the comments that call for a response. This may take a few days, though.

3. Glancing over the comments I detect some non-plussed attitudes. To help in the intermediate, prior to my interaction, I would like to present the logic of the essay which to me is self-evident but I am the one who wrote it!

It may help others, particularly those that are uninitiated in the Veda and Upanishad edifice, to realize that often Vedas and Upanishads are discussed as if they said the same things on all subjects of their concern. This is partly because not even more than a few percent of Hindus have a connection betwen their practiced religion and Vedas/Upanishads. For the subject at hand - The conception of God - the article works on the theme and shows that:

Section (a) - The conceptions of God are distinctly different in Vedas and Upanishads but they are NOT mutually exclusive, rather the Upanishadic thought is a developmental culmination of the Vedas` tentative surmises.

Section (b) - In the Vedas God was propounded and promulgated by humans for their own benefits. The basis of all that was the recognition of the regularities and forces of Nature. God was really a tool for surviving and prospering.

Section (c) - The sophisticated thinkers of the Upanishads recognized the deficiencies of the Vedic conceptions and philosophy and their thinking culminated in the development of MONISM. One has to understand the difference between monotheism which is simply a crutch for escaping the harsh realities of existence and personal responsibility of a lonely being and monism (as fleshed out in the Upanishads).

Finally, the grounding for the assumption of existence of the Soul (whose importance is self-evident not only for Hinduism but for all fully developed religions) is stated in the Upanishadic context.

I hope this helps and I believe adequate references have been provided for a serious reader who wants to have a deeper knowledge of issues just adumbrated here.

I wonder here is the author ``ushil Bhatnagar is ? even after appearance of 47 posts? I hope he would reply to some posts atleast!
Kamath

I wonder here is the author ``ushil Bhatnagar is ? even after appearance of 47 posts? I hope he would reply to some posts atleast!
Kamath

Re: # 34 I would like to comment upon Mr Rizwans opinion about Hinduism. First of all there is no ``origianl founder `` of hinduism. This is a concept about which a `` kitabiya`` is more familier. This is beacuse the base of their religion is that there should be some founder upon whom a diviene book should be `` nazil``. Hinduism is described as `` sanatan dharma`` which by itself means that it has neither a beginning nor an end. There are several theories arising out of upnishads and they constitute main philosophises of Hinduism. Main among them are samkhya, advita, mimansa etc. Main philosophises in Hinduism can be divided into those who did not recognise authority of vedas( which by themself are ``a paurusheya`` meaning created not by any individual, and ``anadi`` and `` anant`` meaning they have no beginning and no end) and those philosophises which recognise the authoity of Vedas. In the former categorey ont can place a philosophy of ``Charvak`` who was a total materialistc person , Baudh darshan i.e. teachings of Lord Buddha and the Jain or Arhat philosophy i.e. teachings of Lord Mahaveer. The main aspect of difference in these various philosophies are the tools by which a thing should be concluded . These tools are ``pratyaksha`` meaning real ``anuman`` meaning inference ``shabd``meaning what ved says etc. It is no doubt that Islam is a great religion but the base of all semetic religions is the life after death and hence ``kiyamat`` and the judgement day. In fact the beauty of Hinduism is it tolerates and accepts that there might be many diverse views about ultimate truth. All these views are recognised, studied and respected by Hinduism.There is one ``shloka`` Akashat patitam toyam yatha gachati sagara sarva dev namskara Keshawam prati gachati`` meaning as the water falls on earth and it ultimately goes to sea so like one prays to any god the prayer goes to Keshav.

#34 RIZWAN


``if there was ever a unified concept of God after the original founder of Hinudism left this world``. Or if Hinduism in its present form is capable of explaining ``purpose of life`` and how to recongnize the ture God.

I am afraid that the depth in which you want to understand Hindu concept of God,any Hindu would be able to explain you upto your conviction simply because Hindus do no think about their Religion and the concept of God, the way Muslims think. Muslims derive their identity from their religion, whereas, Hindus do not.

After going through all the scriptures etc., modern Hindu Philosphers talk about ek Eshwar i.e. One God. This single God has been described in detail in Bhagwadgeeta and the Cosmic Form for this Single God as decsribed in Bhagwadgeeta has been noted the world over.

On the society level, the Puranic Versions of God are more popular like Shiva, Durga etc. The union with God as envisioned in Geeta can be achieved through tougher methods like Meditation etc., whereas union with Puranic Gods is easier i.e. by visiting temples regularly, offering ``prasad``, worhshipping, singing hymns and songs in His praise, visiting ``CHar Dhams`` i.e. Four Places of Pilgrimage, so on and so forth.

Oveall people here dont care much about Hinduism and Godism. They want to keep it as a private affair only. Occasionally, during festivals, the religion is seen a factor strenghtenining social bonds so the festivals like Holi, Deepawali, Rakhi etc. are celebrated with gusto, pomp and show.

Beyond that people are generally not interested. Hardly anyone reads the scriptures, let alone discuss them.

#12-24 RIZWAN

You have written a chain of blogs covering hundreds of aspects--it would have been better if you had covered them one by one--for the simple sake of giving reply by others.

It is not that the replies,that too convincing, to your observations cannot be given. There are replies around there, its for you to find them out, if you interested. Even a moron like me can give replies to you, what to talk of higher souls. But justice cannot be done if the replies are given in a single go--it will take a minimum of one month to discuss the matter threadbare.

I am here touching just one aspect of your initial blog i.e. rebirth of humans in the lower forms of lives according to one`s Karma. You contention is that looking into the numerical strength of animal kingdom, the numerical strength of humans should be astronomically high.

If we go strictly by religion, then Bhagwadgeeta tells us, and rightly so, that there are two forms of matter--Living Matter and dead Matter. The dead matter is just a lump of matter whereas the living matter is also a lump of matter but woven around an entity called Atman--or Soul or Rooh. It is the soul in the living matter which guides its properties. Now soul, i.e. atman, is a part of Paramtma, which is infinite. Now the question comes is there One one type of Soul or different types of Souls--that is the soul of man and soul of a worm is the same or is it different?? If you say that the soul of man is different than that of a worm, them by simple logic, the soul of man is a part of different Paramatma and soul of a worm is that of different Paramatama. In that case, you have to agree for billions and billions of Gods, each corresponding to individual specie. But that does appear to be the case and religion also does not tells so. So, if Soul indeed exists then it is one i.e. part of a single whole.

Now, there are three visible parts of life--Plant Kingdom, Human Kingdom and Animal Kingdom. They are independent of each other. The last two will exist irrespective of each other( provided the Plant Kingdom survives). If all humans die today, animals will still exist. No that if all human die then there will not be any more humans to take lower forms of lives(according to their Karma) and thus animal kingdom should necessarily get extincted when all humans have died. All the religions deal with Human life and not animal or plant life. The Koran talks about the Day of Resurrection--the day when all humans will be raised and will be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. The Koran does not say that all animals will also be raised in the similar manner and the Lion will be asked whether he ate flesh or grass and the deer ate grass or trees. And the Lion and the Deer will be rewarded or punished accordingly. No, thats not the case.

The Karma talks about only Human life and not animals` life. It says, rightly or wrongly, that a man, after his death, has three possible destinations. The first one is Moksha i.e. he gets free from the cycle of life and death and disssolves in the eternity i.e. Paradise. The third one is Narak or hell where he has to burn till eternity. The second one is to return back either as human or lower form of life according to one`s deed. His Karma, will further, decide his ranking in the animal kingdom or Human Kingdom. If his Karma is excellant but does not qualify him for Moksha(the highest order), then his position will be raised in the Human Kingdom ,so on and so forth. If his Karma are worse, he will thrown into Animal Kingdom. Now, once he has been assigned animal kingdom, whether he has any chance to graduate to Human Kingdom. No. as far as I understand. He will attain Moksha straightaway from the Animal Kingdom. This is the way many Hindus explain, extinction of animal species..where have those animals gone..the answer..they have attained Moksha.

So, its a very complex subject. My friendly advice to you is better not get into all this super-natural things which has no answers. Simply go to Temple, Mosque or Church ,according to your religion, pray and try to be a good human being. Thats your Karma and the surest way of attaining Moksha i.e. you are posted in the Head-quarters.

#4 URSTRULY


Hence we can conclude that the invention of multiple gods has served us no purpose.

Its true,I agree. Polytheism is confusing. Even Hindus of today question the relevence of 330 Million Gods and Goddesses. Either there is One God or there is no God at all. There cannot be more than One God(if at all God is there).

But we must remember that ``necessity is the mother of invention``. Hinduism started with Monotheism but later converted into Polytheism particularly with the advent of the ``Puranas``. All sorts of Gods,Elephant Gods, Monkey Gods, Tree Gods etc.etc. appear in the Puranas.(incidentally Puranpanthees i.e. ardent followers of Puranas, say that the word, Koran, has been derived from the word Puran--anyway thats not the question here).

There are two types of polytheism--one that exists in Greek Mythology and the other one which exists in Hindu Mythology. The Greek Gods & Goddesses i.e.Apollo, Aphrodite, Athena, Hermes, Zeus etc. were considered to be independent and abosolute in themselves. Whereas in Hindu Mythology, all the Gods and Goddesses are seen to be the manifestation of the single Brahm or Parmatma or simply Bhagwan. If you look into the qualities of Brahm or Parmatma or Bhagwan, it will be the same as God or Allah of Abrahmic religions like Single, Omnipotent, Omnipresent, without having male or female forms, without any partners, all powerful, creator, destroyer etc.etc. So, Hindusim is that not Polytheism as is normally understood.

Perhaps, Hindusim has turned polytheisist, because of the necessity over the time. Take for example, Kashmir Earthquake. We know today that the earthquake is a natural phenomenon and God has no role to play in it. If we believe that the quake was caused by Allah, then ,we are again moving towards the primitive religions where every natural phenomenon like rain, lighting was attributed to some God. But those who have suffered the earthquake are asking themselves why they have got this punishment?? For once, you can explain them that this is a natural disaster, which has nothing to do with Allah. But Kashmir is a quake prone area, quakes will continue to strike there--so may be one day it may happen that the sufferers may stop believing in God at all. You will agree that this will be the worst case. Now then, how will you convince them of Allah??

Answer-Polytheism-Hindu style!!!

Now how Hindu Philosphers explain their Polytheism is that for example consider a Lake or a Pond. Its full of water right. Now you take a bucket of water from the pond. The pond is still there but there is also a bucket with Pond`s water--which is now separate from the Pond. In other words, the Pond can be said be be made of thousands and thousands of buckets of water. Each bucket is separate yet it is one. Scientifically, this is the theory of whole and part. Each whole is a whole as well as each part is a whole and vice-versa. Now in the Hindu Trinity--Brahma is the creator and Shiva is the destroyer. Brahma does not wield any power over Shiva. Vishnu is the preserver who acts preserves Brahma`s creation from Shiva`s destruction. So when quake strikes, Shiva is at work and when there is no quake, Vishnu is at work. So this kind of juggelery atleast saves the Almighty from the getting the blame of human hardships and sufferings and escapes the wrath of mankind.

So you cant say that invention of multiple Gods has not served any purpose. It has. It has saved Single God from getting extincted.

#6 TAHMED32


I followed Sanjay`s link to learn a bit more about hindu philosophy (about which other hindu posters below write approvingly) - and see this link to explain hindu philosophy starts with Islam is the most violent and intolerant faith that has ever been presented to mankind. . And the rest of the website is nothing but a ``hate islam`` diatribe.

Its true that AS`s website is a bit anti-islamic though he is not an out-an-out Islam-basher.

My purpose of providing the link was to see Hinduism through his eyes and not Islam. If we want to understand the true meanings of Islam then obviously his website is not the place.

Hope you got my point.

#3 SUBASHJOSHI


One thing I do not understand - if all souls emanate from supreme soul, and the ultimate goal of soul (Atman) is a union with supreme soul (Parmatman), then why does the whole thing begin in the first place? Why go through the mortal coil of millions of births to go back? May be a bad question, but...

Unfortunately, nobody or no religion has answered that question. To my mind, even Koran does not answer this question as to why did Allah create everything in the first place. What for??

(I think) only Atheism can give reply to your question--that is either creation is God`s helplessness or creation is inevitable-God or no God.