Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
What is wrong with my post or with Swami Krishnananda? Nobody is genuine. We are all 'maya'. Where is the head and where is the tail of your post? 
Hindu deities=1 God?
- Thread starter fitd
- Start date
B
brijesh
Guest
There are 3.3 milion deities in hinduism. every daity is a form of god. It is completely rubish put perfectly true. I think the whole existance is got. Existance is creator and creation and hence god. So even if you say thousands billion form of god, i agree. completely agree.
www.royalmonk.in your personal tour guide in india
Bhaktajan II
Hare Krishna Yogi
- Messages
- 2,277
- Reaction score
- 115
- Points
- 63
the Hindu's Vedic Literatures.
Hindu God is One.
Hindu pantheon of the generations of celestial descendants of Brahma are known as the Family Tree of Brahma's offspring ---that is what is explained in the Vedas.
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/hindu-deities-1-god-13968-3.html#post256826
Hindu God is One.
Hindu pantheon of the generations of celestial descendants of Brahma are known as the Family Tree of Brahma's offspring ---that is what is explained in the Vedas.
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/hindu-deities-1-god-13968-3.html#post256826
Did anybody notice this? Here is the very first quote from Rugveda showing Hinduism does depend on God(s) and immediately the quote is followed by a contradictory statement that Hinduism does not depend on God or gods.
Who decides what is biased or unbiased? Based on what standards?
I find the translation and interpretation quite vague, equivocal and ambiguous.
What is meant by "maya"? If we are all "maya" and allthings are Brahman, you are Brahman and I am Brahman, then Brahman is "maya".
If all things are Brahman, then who has a desire for knowledge of Brahman? Is it Brahman itself thirsting for knowledge of Brahman? That must be one ignorant Brahman then...
On the other hand if we are all "maya" then how can "maya" thirst for knowledge of Brahman, besides "maya" being same as Brahman as per your convoluted logic.
Ok, this is me butting my non Hindu non Buddhist nose in. But in my understanding of Christianity...Jesus figured this out...we are all one...but we just don't know it. We call it Christ Consciousness, putting on the mind of Christ as Paul tells us.
So yeah, to me we are all Brahman, all Maya...but we don't know it....the opening is opening upto our connection to that allness, realizing it, grokking it, becoming it.
So yeah, to me we are all Brahman, all Maya...but we don't know it....the opening is opening upto our connection to that allness, realizing it, grokking it, becoming it.
Vedic teachings do not teach one mind theory or universal consciousness. This is superimposition of Buddhist teachings on Vedic teachings by Adi Sankara of Advaita school. Vedic teachings believe in a strict hierarchy of celestial beings called Devatas and One Supreme God ruling over them eternally. The hierarchy exists even among human beings and this hierarchy is eternal. Vedic teachings are strictly theistic and NOT monistic nor panentheistic or whatever. It does allow worship of beings other than Supreme God as long as they are part of Vedic pantheon.
Entities from other religions can never be absorbed into Vedic system and is strictly forbidden.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
So now, you are going to teach me Hinduism? Check Mandala 10, Hymn 129, Verse 6 of RugVeda which says that Gods are post creation of the world.
को अद्धा वेद क इह पर वोचत कुत आजाता कुत इयंविस्र्ष्टिः |
अर्वाग देवा अस्य विसर्जनेनाथा को वेद यताबभूव ||
Who verily knows and who can here declare it, whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?
The Rig Veda in Sanskrit: Rig Veda Book 10: Hymn 129
How many Gods? One, three, Ten? Or 'advaita' - 'Aham Brahmasmi'. All these are valid Hindu stances. Does any one any where says so about 'dharma'. No. Dharma is most important in Hinduism. Dharma-Vyadha did not know any Gods of Goddesses, he just knew and performed his dharma and he found a place in Srimad Bhagawatham. The definition of Hinduism is dharma, not Gods.
So before you accuse me of not understanding Hinduism, first learn it yourself.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
I have written it, it is my opinion. You differ with it. That is OK. Go to whichever translation you like. Where is the problem?
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
Do we know Brahman? I do not know what it knows and what it does not know. My books say Brahman and Maya are indivisible. The presence of Brahman is accompanied by Maya. Do you claim to know what no one knows in Hinduism? 'Maya' can do all kinds of things which we cannot even imagine. Even great sages could not understand 'maya'. 'Maya' can make us thirst for knowledge, it can even make us hate knowledge.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
If it was so, why did he condemn the cities?
"Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum,
which art exalted unto heaven,
shalt be brought down to hell:
for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee."
Out of oneness? Don't say something which is so easily refutable.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
Well, we here in India worship Shiva, Durga, Rama, Krishna, Ganesha, Kartikeya, Hanumana. None of these entities are mentioned in the Vedas. They are not part of the Vedic pantheon. What do you make out of it? We are talking of Hinduism and not Vedic religion. Vedic religion can be a part of Hinduism, but Hinduism is not Vedic religion. The worship of Indra is banned in India. Any more questions?
Yes I am going to teach you not only Hinduism and Vedas, but some humility as well...
Your quote on Nasadiya Sukta has an answer in the Viswakarma Sukta of Rugveda...10:82:3..Check it out
The same Aham Brahmasmi has Dvaita interpretation, consistent with rest of the of the Vedas. Not to mention the verse 10:129:6 is in direct opposition to advaita, for it assumes multiplicity of gods and reality of creation. Without such an implicit assumption of bheda or differences, Vedic statements are void and meaningless. I am not sure it you even understand the basics of even advaita to understand properly what you have written here.
Now wait a second...I thought you said only Brahman exists....then suddenly maya popped out of nowhere and then Gods and now dharma...
Dharma-vyadha's teachings in Mahabharatha assumes existence of God and gods and he himself teaches worship of deities as part of dharma. Where do you assume dharma is deviod of worship of gods or God.
The very question "Do we know Brahman" assumes bheda between "we" and "Brahman". Show where in original texts it is said that Brahman and maya are indivisible? Is knowledge different from Brahman? What do you mean by "indivisible"? Are they identical or are they two different entities stuck together?
You are a neo-advaita follower...First learn what sankara said about maya and then write here..Obviously you do not know what he has said in tje first place.
Worship of Indra is banned in India???? says who? you..
Shiva is Rudra...refer birth of Rudra in Shathapatha Brahmana....
Durga is referred as Uma in Upanishad who appears before Indra and teaches about Brahman...Lets see if you can figure which Upanishad it is...
Rama, krishnaetc. are avatara of Vishnu....They may not find direct mention in Vedic texts, however are part of Vedic pantheon from itihaasa. The words itihaasa and Purana find ample mention in Upanishads and it is obvious by tradition which texts they refer to. Karthikeya, Hanuman, Ganesha find mention in Purana. So they are all Vedic pantheon and is Vedic religion. Even your Adi Sankara did not consider any of these Gods as outside Vedic pantheon.
ŕ̥caḥ sā́māni cʰándāṃsi purāṇáṃ yájuṣā sahá /
úccʰiṣṭāj jajñire sárve diví devā́ diviśrítaḥ //
The riks and the sâmans, the metres, the ancient legends (purânam) together with the yagus, all gods in the heavens, founded upon heaven, were born of the ukkhishta.(Atharva Veda 11:7:24)
Taittriya Aranyak 2:9:1
www(dot)sanskritweb.org/yajurveda/ta-comb.pdf
yadbrAhmanÀnItihAsAnpurAnAni kalpAngÀthA nArASsamsIrmedAhutayo
Again this verse lists Brahmana, itihasa, purana etc. each text in plural one after another showing these are different texts.
Vedic texts were clearly aware of itihaasa and Purana texts as shown above.
úccʰiṣṭāj jajñire sárve diví devā́ diviśrítaḥ //
The riks and the sâmans, the metres, the ancient legends (purânam) together with the yagus, all gods in the heavens, founded upon heaven, were born of the ukkhishta.(Atharva Veda 11:7:24)
Taittriya Aranyak 2:9:1
www(dot)sanskritweb.org/yajurveda/ta-comb.pdf
yadbrAhmanÀnItihAsAnpurAnAni kalpAngÀthA nArASsamsIrmedAhutayo
Again this verse lists Brahmana, itihasa, purana etc. each text in plural one after another showing these are different texts.
Vedic texts were clearly aware of itihaasa and Purana texts as shown above.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
"Your quote on Nasadiya Sukta has an answer in ..": Yes, one rishi said something, the other said something else. It always happens in Hinduism. 'Matas' (opinions). That is how we have so many varieties of 'advaita'.
"Vedic statements are void and meaningless": I am sorry to hear this from you.
"Now wait a second...I thought you said only Brahman exists....then suddenly maya popped out of nowhere and then Gods and now dharma...": Dharma, of course, is supreme. That is my opinion (Mata) and that of many other Hindus. Dharma-Vyadha is free to have his own opinion (Mata). That does not affect what I believe. "Tunde-tunde Matirbhinna".
"The very question "Do we know Brahman" assumes bheda between "we" and "Brahman".: No, it does not. Do we know what constitutes us. Molecules, atoms, sub-atomic particles, physical energy, then what? Where does this physical energy come from? Is it eternal or rises from an 'absolute nothing'? Science does not have answers for these questions. Therefore, Brahman, which constitutes us and all other things in the universe at the 'Vyavaharika' level of reality, is not known.
"Worship of Indra is banned in India???? says who? you..": Do you have any temple of Indra in India? Invocation of Indra in Yajnas or in other rituals is a formality. The worship is for other Gods and Goddesses.
By the time of Shatapatha Brahmana, Aryans were in India and these adjustments were already made. Why are any of the Gods that Hindus worship today are not mentioned in the Vedas, particularly in RigVeda?
The simple answer which I have already given is that Hinduism is not Vedic religion, though the Vedic religion was accepted as a part of Hinduism. Upanishads too are post-RigVeda.
Vishnu was a minor God in Vedas, one of the eight, ten, or twelve adityas, with just five or six hymns in RigVeda. Vishnu assumed importance after being associated with the indigenous Gods, Krishna, Rama, Parashurama, Vamana, Nrisimha, Varaha, Kurma, and Matsya; and at a later time, Buddha.
Itihasas, Puranas, were written by indigenous people or naturalized Aryans (Vedavyasa) and contained old indigenous stories. That is not Vedic Pantheon. Read about the Vedic Pantheon at A Vedic Reader (Excerpts). There are a lot of interpolations in all books. Yajurveda and AtharvaVeda are the later ones. Therefore, I go only by RigVeda.
"Vedic statements are void and meaningless": I am sorry to hear this from you.
"Now wait a second...I thought you said only Brahman exists....then suddenly maya popped out of nowhere and then Gods and now dharma...": Dharma, of course, is supreme. That is my opinion (Mata) and that of many other Hindus. Dharma-Vyadha is free to have his own opinion (Mata). That does not affect what I believe. "Tunde-tunde Matirbhinna".
"The very question "Do we know Brahman" assumes bheda between "we" and "Brahman".: No, it does not. Do we know what constitutes us. Molecules, atoms, sub-atomic particles, physical energy, then what? Where does this physical energy come from? Is it eternal or rises from an 'absolute nothing'? Science does not have answers for these questions. Therefore, Brahman, which constitutes us and all other things in the universe at the 'Vyavaharika' level of reality, is not known.
"Worship of Indra is banned in India???? says who? you..": Do you have any temple of Indra in India? Invocation of Indra in Yajnas or in other rituals is a formality. The worship is for other Gods and Goddesses.
By the time of Shatapatha Brahmana, Aryans were in India and these adjustments were already made. Why are any of the Gods that Hindus worship today are not mentioned in the Vedas, particularly in RigVeda?
The simple answer which I have already given is that Hinduism is not Vedic religion, though the Vedic religion was accepted as a part of Hinduism. Upanishads too are post-RigVeda.
Vishnu was a minor God in Vedas, one of the eight, ten, or twelve adityas, with just five or six hymns in RigVeda. Vishnu assumed importance after being associated with the indigenous Gods, Krishna, Rama, Parashurama, Vamana, Nrisimha, Varaha, Kurma, and Matsya; and at a later time, Buddha.
Itihasas, Puranas, were written by indigenous people or naturalized Aryans (Vedavyasa) and contained old indigenous stories. That is not Vedic Pantheon. Read about the Vedic Pantheon at A Vedic Reader (Excerpts). There are a lot of interpolations in all books. Yajurveda and AtharvaVeda are the later ones. Therefore, I go only by RigVeda.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
But, 'matas' (opinions) apart (about which nothing much can be done), I am happy to have a discussion with you. Hope we will have more. 'Ma vidvishavahai'.
If this is your opinion that Vedas have no consistent message and has contradictory messages then God help Vedas from the like of you. Just like when Vedas use singular Rudra to refer to Shiva and RudrA is used to refer to other gods, similarly when the word devAh is used to refer to all devatAh in Nasadiya Sukta, except the Vedic God referred to in Visvakarma Sukta.
Advaitis have a habit of taking statements out of context and twisting it, be it Vedic scriptural statements or others statements.
If Vedic statements are not consistent in meaning or contradictory or if advaita is imposed on Vedas ONLY then "Vedic statements are void and meaningless". This was my statement.
The truth is Vedas are consistent in its teaching all throughout. It is advaita that is inconsistent, meaningless and void.
The problem is you claimed Dharma-Vyadha supports your opinion and claimed that Vedic religion also has similar teachings. Now that is misleading..
Even in the question what constitutes us, there is bheda between particular characteristics of "us" and us as a whole. Without bheda no meaningful statement can be made.
When you used the statement "Therefore, Brahman, which constitutes us and all other things in the universe" already bheda is introduced.
The concept of 'Vyavaharika' level etc. (tripartite reality) is clearly plagiarism of followers of Sankara from Nagarjuna school of Buddhism. This is another clear evidence that Sankara and his followers superimposed Buddhist teachings on Vedas.
This means popularity of that deity is not there presently, not that his worship is banned. The very idea of banning worship of Vedic gods is contrary to Hinduism. In yajnas it is not mere formaility, but a requirement as per Vedic injunctions. Otherwise results won't fructify for yajnas.
You make an assumption and follow western interpretation which I do not agree and do not find support in Vedic scriptures. Youhave no answer for already quoted verses from Atharva veda and Taittiriya Aranyaka mentioning Puranas and Brahmanas. This shows Vedic people were already aware of itihaasa, Purana etc. and your claim is false.
Your simple answer is simply wrong and assumes western Indology is truth.