Brahman or God

[Aupmanyav]

It doesn't sound like your idea of Brahman has much do to with Hinduism.

It is very much Hinduism, orthodox, correct to the word (Advaita: non-duality); only that others did/do not the courage to accept that (abandoning the God idea). Where is non-duality if one accepts God?

Then the first being was a hydrogen molecule.

There was something before that too.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Dressing up atheism as Hinduism is peculiar.

Peculiar to those who have not studied about it (Atheism in Hinduism - Wikipedia). That is ages old. First appeared in RigVeda about 3,000 years ago.

"The Gods are later than this world's production. Who knows then whence it first came into being?"
https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10129.htm (Translation by Ralph Griffith)

Then the orthodox philosophies: Samkhya (Samkhya - Wikipedia), Vaisesika (Vaisheshika - Wikipedia), Mimamsa (Mīmāṃsā - Wikipedia), Advaita Vedanta (Gaudapada - Wikipedia).

 

[Cassandra]

Not true, Brahman is just human imagination, it doesn't exist.

What brought you to that conclusion?

There is no such thing as Brahman, any more than there is the flying spaghetti monster.

Brahman is not a thing, that much all will agree on.

The flying spagetti monster can be imagined, created a mental picture of.
Brahman can not be imagined. As such it is not a product of imagination.

 

[Cassandra]

The 'knower' does not alter 'what exists'. The 'knower' only gets a particular perspective, like two observers moving past something with different speeds.

Greetings Aupmanyav,

Do you equate knower with observer? If not what is the difference?

 

[ajay0]

Not very well-informed, but saying Brahman is just the universe sounds more like materialism than Hinduism.

Which Hindu text or scripture says that Brahman is just the universe ! This is simply untrue.

Prajñānam brahma - Brahman is pure consciousness (Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)


Brahman is fundamentally pure consciousness, and matter, energy, space, time and causation are considered its grosser manifestations.

This is also the perception of enlightened masters both in the west and east.

Do not get misled by pseudo-scholars posing as advaitans and do exercise your own discretion through your own study and investigation into the subject through its scriptures.

 

[ajay0]

Yes, that's a reason, but it doesn't seem like "the" reason. Do you know what I mean?

What is threatening about outrageous blasphemy? I wonder if there was a political motivation? The conservative fundamentalists were the ruling elite? The non-dual message threatened their political power?

When Jesus or Mansur Al Hallaj declared themselves as one with God or Truth, they were merely expressing their perception sincerely from the vantage point of enlightenment.

However, the orthodox rabbis and mullahs , due to their conditioned mindsets, saw their pronouncements as a challenge to the privileged positions they enjoyed in human society as mediators between God and human beings. If Jesus and Mansur were embodiments of divinity themselves, it would reduce the stock value of rabbis and mullahs in the eyes of religious adherents.

This would have been a potential catastrophe for them, and this could have motivated them to declare Jesus and Mansur as blasphemous heretics to keep their hitherto respectable and secure positions in society safe and sound.

 

[sealchan]

Observation does not decide, it gives us the facts. It is analysis (Viveka) which takes us to truth. That is meditation (Dhyana), contemplation. Knowing 'what exists' is not difficult. What did we start with at the time of Big bang? Physical Energy. That is what exists. That constitutes all things in the universe. It is about the properties of energy that we do not exactly know. What gives rise to this energy? What is its relation with space and time? Etc.

It seems like you are saying the it is easy to know that there exists energy but how it relates to everything else is a mystery. That is an odd way to start a foundation of knowledge.

I know I have a body, I know that it takes up space and that in some moment in time I was conceived, then born. Someday in the future of time, I will die. During this time of my life I am conscious. I move. I see other things move. My mouth forms words which I can know in my mind before or after I speak them. My actions cause things to happen I intended or not. This is a basis for knowledge and everything else including the spiritual and the scientific largely derived from our personal, bodily experience of ourselves and our environment. The brain and the body develop together to support adequate cognitive skills and determine social success.

 

[Sand Dancer]

This is also similar to Jesus' saying....

I and the Father are one. John 10:30

It is great, but some think that only Jesus and the father are one, not everyone and the father.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Not true, Brahman is just human imagination, it doesn't exist. There is no such thing as Brahman, any more than there is the flying spaghetti monster.

I thought Sikhs believed in a god.

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is an odd way to start a foundation of knowledge.

I know I have a body, I know that it takes up space and that in some moment in time I was conceived, then born. Someday in the future of time, I will die. During this time of my life I am conscious. I move. I see other things move. My mouth forms words which I can know in my mind before or after I speak them. My actions cause things to happen I intended or not. This is a basis for knowledge and everything else including the spiritual and the scientific largely derived from our personal, bodily experience of ourselves and our environment. The brain and the body develop together to support adequate cognitive skills and determine social success.

I do not find anything odd in this. We have come to know of many things that body does, We do not know all of it. It is the same with the (seeming) creation of the universe also. We have a lot more to know, which our future generations will know.

 

[Unguru]

I thought Sikhs believed in a god.

Not 'a' God, we believe in Waheguru. There is one God in all, everything is from it.

 

[Unguru]

What brought you to that conclusion?

Aupmanyav's comments in combination with the typical idiocy I often hear from Hindus, you get what you pay for I suppose.

 

[ajay0]

It is great, but some think that only Jesus and the father are one, not everyone and the father.

It is just the working of the conditioned mind.

In Jesus's time, the rabbis found his words equating himself with divinity as blasphemous and falsely convicted him to get him killed and rid of.

After the Catholic church came up, they created the doctrine that only God and Jesus are divine, and none else. ( contrary to Jesus's teachings).

When Meister Eckhart , like Jesus, came up with nondualistic teachings of God, the Catholic Church, in great irony, criticized his teachings considering it heretical, and almost did to him what the Rabbis and Romans did to Jesus. His death before the verdict came out saved him from the Inquisition.

The eye with which I see God is the same with which God sees me. My eye and God's eye is one eye, and one sight, and one knowledge, and one love. - Meister Eckhart

All that the Eternal Father teaches and reveals is His being, His nature, and His Godhead, which He manifests to us in His Son, and teaches us that we are also His Son. - Meister Eckhart

 

[Aupmanyav]

In a civil forum, you show your idiocy by calling views different from your own as idiocy. Is it necessary that every one should follow your views? Does not your religion asks you to respect all? Is that what Sri Guru Nanak said or did? What kind of Sikh are you?

Brahman does not exist but Waheguru does. Would you tell me the difference between the two? What you write is laughable.

 

[Muffled]

how can you know brahman or god, if you can't experience it first person?

by someone telling you? if so, then how can they know brahman, or god, if they didn't experience it first person?

I believe I experience Him first person.

 

[Muffled]

The only way to "know" Brahman is to become Brahman. One can, however, begin to get a mental or mathematical picture of the phenomenon from theoretical physics -- string theories and such.

God? God's whatever you make Him/Her/It/Them. There are millions of different god concepts; you can pick and choose.

I believe on can't become Brahman.

I believe I have my doubts about that but it would be interesting to hear your theory.

I believe if one chooses the wrong one it will not work out well.

 

[Muffled]

Because they are engaging in philosophy and speculation.

I believe that is a baseless assumption.

 

[ajay0]

I believe I experience Him first person.

I believe on can't become Brahman.

I believe I have my doubts about that but it would be interesting to hear your theory.

I believe if one chooses the wrong one it will not work out well.

I believe that is a baseless assumption.

Belief means you do not know, and if you know, you do not have to believe.What is your actual perception !

 

[Howard Is]

Since there is no experiencing without it you can’t miss.

but then why do some see it as an event separate from self, or without self involvement?

Because they are engaging in philosophy and speculation.

I believe that is a baseless assumption.

If Brahman is “an event separate from self, or without self involvement”, then it would be unknown and unknowable. It could only be speculation.

 

[ajay0]

In nondualist and advaitan philosophy, both the higher Self (awareness) and lower self ( ego or mind) is emphasized and considered to be distinct from each other.

Here are some sayings that shed better light and insight on this subject...

The Self, our Being, is awareness. - Sri Muruganar

Chit ( awareness ) means pure knowledge. - Swami Prajnanpad

Knowledge and 'I' ( Self) are both one. - Sree Narayan Guru

The mind is ignorance. - Shankaracharya ( Vivekachudamani )

Your true nature is awareness and not what your mind is producing. - Burt Harding

Awareness is the background for all of our experiences, and yet in our ordinary day-to-day lives, it is often obscured by habituated thoughts and emotions. Most teaching and meditation practices are designed to cut through this habituated seeing into the Background of Awareness which is our innate nature and which is, in and of itself, Clear Seeing. -- Metta Zetty

If Brahman is “an event separate from self, or without self involvement”, then it would be unknown and unknowable. It could only be speculation.

Brahman is indeed separate from the lower self or ego, which is considered fictional and corresponds to the higher Self or pure consciousness/awareness.

The lower self or ego is constituted by desires in the form of cravings and aversions, and we mostly identify with our ego or lower self rather than the Self due to ignorance and external conditioning.