Concept of God

[Charzhino]

I have been reading the Bhagvad Gita and it's very elegant and articulate on the nature of the universe, the dealings of righetouess actions and the reality of God. However, in comparing it to the whole of Hinduism I don't understand the actual concept of God. The following is Verse 3, Chapter 10 in the Geeta when Krishna proclaimed:

''One who knows me as birthless, beginningless, and the supreme controller of all the worlds; he being undeluded among mortals is delivered from all sins.''

Now my question is , if the true reality of God in Hinduism is this description, why is there a belief that God incarnates as man onto the earth as avatars such as Raama, Vishnu, Mahesh, and even Krishna himself?

 

[Andal]

I have been reading the Bhagvad Gita and it's very elegant and articulate on the nature of the universe, the dealings of righetouess actions and the reality of God. However, in comparing it to the whole of Hinduism I don't understand the actual concept of God. The following is Verse 3, Chapter 10 in the Geeta when Krishna proclaimed:

''One who knows me as birthless, beginningless, and the supreme controller of all the worlds; he being undeluded among mortals is delivered from all sins.''

Now my question is , if the true reality of God in Hinduism is this description, why is there a belief that God incarnates as man onto the earth as avatars such as Raama, Vishnu, Mahesh, and even Krishna himself?

Namaste and welcome to the board

God is without beginning and without end. He is pure love, compassion, and wisdom. He has both personal and impersonal qualities. He doesn't incarnate exactly. The word Avatar literally means, to descend. He descend onto earth when dharma has disappeared or close to disappearing. He appears to restore righteousness among beings and to teach a path back to him. This doesn't negate his birthless or beginingless nature. When he descends onto the earth he is born of a mother but that doesn't mean that God has a begining or true birth. It's illusion. when God comes to the world he comes the same way each of us do. Think of it this way too. In the Gita Krishna teaches that we are the same way. There has never been a time when we didn't exist and those who think they can kill and those who think they can be killed are mistaken.

 

[Madhuri]

Now my question is , if the true reality of God in Hinduism is this description, why is there a belief that God incarnates as man onto the earth as avatars such as Raama, Vishnu, Mahesh, and even Krishna himself?

Also know that the manifestations of God such as Rama and Krishna etc. are not normal human bodies. They are transcendental and nothing like the idea that Christians have of Jesus.

But as KK has said, this quote does not refer to his Avatars. It speaks of His eternal nature, which has no begining and no end.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Charzhino,

Concept of God

The problem with human mind that it can only *THINK* about aspects with limits and this opening up the limitations of the mind to limitlessness is the journey.

In the same context uptill NOW, god has been misunderstood by most people to mean something. God is just a concept for an understanding that it is that which includes everything.
We do not see air but we know it exists, it is there and only realise it when it moves.
Similarly god should be understood as *NOTHINGNESS* which can be termed as *ENERGY* and so in sanatan dharma it is referred to as *SHAKTI*. In Tao it is referred to as NOTHINGNESS.
Out of *Nothingness* appears forms and no-forms; meaning whatever we see are *forms* and what we do not see are *no-forms* and so humans too are just another form like the planets, trees, animals etc. These forms and no-forms are always in a flux, nothing is stationary and they all keep changing forms as energy. They are neither created nor destroyed as they are ETERNAL and this LAW is called the ETERNAL LAW or Sanatan Dharma.

Once this is understood then all names are just *labels* call it god/bhagwan/allah/etc.
personally prefer NOTHINGNESS.

Love & rgds

 

[Charzhino]

Also know that the manifestations of God such as Rama and Krishna etc. are not normal human bodies. They are transcendental and nothing like the idea that Christians have of Jesus.

But as KK has said, this quote does not refer to his Avatars. It speaks of His eternal nature, which has no begining and no end.

What do you exactly mean by transcendental, and how is it different from the Christian view of Jesus' divine nature?

 

[Charzhino]

Friend Charzhino,



The problem with human mind that it can only *THINK* about aspects with limits and this opening up the limitations of the mind to limitlessness is the journey.

In the same context uptill NOW, god has been misunderstood by most people to mean something. God is just a concept for an understanding that it is that which includes everything.
We do not see air but we know it exists, it is there and only realise it when it moves.
Similarly god should be understood as *NOTHINGNESS* which can be termed as *ENERGY* and so in sanatan dharma it is referred to as *SHAKTI*. In Tao it is referred to as NOTHINGNESS.
Out of *Nothingness* appears forms and no-forms; meaning whatever we see are *forms* and what we do not see are *no-forms* and so humans too are just another form like the planets, trees, animals etc. These forms and no-forms are always in a flux, nothing is stationary and they all keep changing forms as energy. They are neither created nor destroyed as they are ETERNAL and this LAW is called the ETERNAL LAW or Sanatan Dharma.

Once this is understood then all names are just *labels* call it god/bhagwan/allah/etc.
personally prefer NOTHINGNESS.

Love & rgds

Thanks , that's a much appreciated answer.

 

[Madhuri]

What do you exactly mean by transcendental, and how is it different from the Christian view of Jesus' divine nature?

Christians see Jesus as truly human. He suffers, for instance.

God avatars in Hinduism are generally seen as non-different to the Spiritual manifestations. He does not need to take on a material body to manifest in the material world. God in this universe is different from a realised personality, or a great mystic. He maintains His complete Divine potency and His body cannot be blemished and he does not suffer. He plays a role for the sake of the human beings and appears human to those covered by maya, but He is, even in this world, completely Spiritual.

I'm sure that Jesus was as well, it is only that Christians do not seem to have this idea. They tend to see Jesus as completely human body, flesh and blood.

 

[Charzhino]

Christians see Jesus as truly human. He suffers, for instance.

God avatars in Hinduism are generally seen as non-different to the Spiritual manifestations. He does not need to take on a material body to manifest in the material world. God in this universe is different from a realised personality, or a great mystic. He maintains His complete Divine potency and His body cannot be blemished and he does not suffer. He plays a role for the sake of the human beings and appears human to those covered by maya, but He is, even in this world, completely Spiritual.

I'm sure that Jesus was as well, it is only that Christians do not seem to have this idea. They tend to see Jesus as completely human body, flesh and blood.

Does that have to do with Brahaman appearing as Ishwara and all his manfifestations under the influence of Maya from the people, which is considered false?
I think Christians refer to Jesus and fully God and fully man at the same time, which is kind of confusing.

 

[Madhuri]

Does that have to do with Brahaman appearing as Ishwara and all his manfifestations under the influence of Maya from the people, which is considered false?
I think Christians refer to Jesus and fully God and fully man at the same time, which is kind of confusing.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean based on the philosophy that states that the Brahman is the Absolute and the personal manifesations are illusion?

That is not what I meant in this case but there are certianly Hindus that accept this philosophy.

Yes, the Christian idea is confusing and seems strange to me sometimes.

 

[Charzhino]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean based on the philosophy that states that the Brahman is the Absolute and the personal manifesations are illusion?

That is not what I meant in this case but there are certianly Hindus that accept this philosophy.

Yes, the Christian idea is confusing and seems strange to me sometimes.

Yes but not entirely an illusion from a person still under influence of Maya, in that a person may regard the human being as God, wheras it is not the true case, as you said before. I've been reading sections of the Advaita Vedenta and trying to interpret this concept as it's quite hard to grasp, so am I correct or still way off lol?

 

[Madhuri]

Yes but not entirely an illusion from a person still under influence of Maya, in that a person may regard the human being as God, wheras it is not the true case, as you said before. I've been reading sections of the Advaita Vedenta and trying to interpret this concept as it's quite hard to grasp, so am I correct or still way off lol?

You seem to be on the right track. Advaita Vedanta focusses on the Oneness of everything to the Divine, or Brahman. It sees no seperateness. It teaches that our perception of individuality and distinction from the One is maya.

The Dvaita Vedanta is the opposite. It teaches complete duality, having a strong focus on a personal God much like the Abrahamic concept.

Then there is the DvaitaAdvaita philosophy which teaches that we are all simultaneously one with and different from God. Yes, we are a manifesation of the Divine, but we also maintain an eternal individuality.
(This is the philosophy that I follow)

According to any of these, maya is the illusion that we are completely seperate/distinct. But the last two usually see the personal manifestation of God to be the Supreme rather than Brahman, which is His Effulgence or one aspect of Him.

So to bring this into context, when an avatar appears in the material world it is illusion that stops people from recognising that the personality is God. Our blindness prevents us from seeing the divinity. But it has nothing to do with the Brahman converting into physical manifestation.

Edited to say: I hope that made sense...I am SO tired right now, lol.

 

[GURSIKH]

Christians see Jesus as truly human. He suffers, for instance.

God avatars in Hinduism are generally seen as non-different to the Spiritual manifestations. He does not need to take on a material body to manifest in the material world. God in this universe is different from a realised personality, or a great mystic. He maintains His complete Divine potency and His body cannot be blemished and he does not suffer. He plays a role for the sake of the human beings and appears human to those covered by maya, but He is, even in this world, completely Spiritual.

I'm sure that Jesus was as well, it is only that Christians do not seem to have this idea. They tend to see Jesus as completely human body, flesh and blood.

hi Maduri ,

what is meant by " he does not suffer" kidly ellaborate.

 

[Charzhino]

You seem to be on the right track. Advaita Vedanta focusses on the Oneness of everything to the Divine, or Brahman. It sees no seperateness. It teaches that our perception of individuality and distinction from the One is maya.

The Dvaita Vedanta is the opposite. It teaches complete duality, having a strong focus on a personal God much like the Abrahamic concept.

Then there is the DvaitaAdvaita philosophy which teaches that we are all simultaneously one with and different from God. Yes, we are a manifesation of the Divine, but we also maintain an eternal individuality.
(This is the philosophy that I follow)

According to any of these, maya is the illusion that we are completely seperate/distinct. But the last two usually see the personal manifestation of God to be the Supreme rather than Brahman, which is His Effulgence or one aspect of Him.

So to bring this into context, when an avatar appears in the material world it is illusion that stops people from recognising that the personality is God. Our blindness prevents us from seeing the divinity. But it has nothing to do with the Brahman converting into physical manifestation.

Edited to say: I hope that made sense...I am SO tired right now, lol.

I'll have to keep re-reading for it to actually sink in, some of these concepts and philosophy are quite complex but thanks for the response!

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

YouTube - What is Conciousness ?

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

I have been reading the Bhagvad Gita and it's very elegant and articulate on the nature of the universe, the dealings of righetouess actions and the reality of God. However, in comparing it to the whole of Hinduism I don't understand the actual concept of God. The following is Verse 3, Chapter 10 in the Geeta when Krishna proclaimed:

''One who knows me as birthless, beginningless, and the supreme controller of all the worlds; he being undeluded among mortals is delivered from all sins.''

Now my question is , if the true reality of God in Hinduism is this description, why is there a belief that God incarnates as man onto the earth as avatars such as Raama, Vishnu, Mahesh, and even Krishna himself?

All Hindu schools of thought ( As far as I can tell ) believe that any philosoical expression is a dim refection of the truth. So all of the hindu arguments are over who's system is more accurate.

I would like to answer this question from the Advaita Vedanta point of view. My school of thought is the Sakta system which is almost exactly like the Advaita school but with a few improvements. ( Can you see my prejudice)
We don't see Maya only as an illusion but also as God Herself. Most people (In he west ) who know about Hinduism, better understand Advaita Vedanta so it is easier to use that sect’s ideas when I post on this forum.

The way to see the concept of the Avatar or Incarnation of God is best expressed in a illustration.

We believe that Brahman is the ground of all being of the whole cosmos. Everything and everyone is Brahman. So lets visualize Brahman as an eternal ocean. All of us are just little ripples in that eternal ocean. Once in a while a great tsunami comes and changes everything. This great wave is an Avatar. He takes away all the corruption of the religion that builds up over time. The Avatar is the purist idea of God that we can understand in maya. I am Brahman and I can find out my true nature. But, I am just a little ripple not a super wave like an incarnation of God. It is by the help of the incarnation that we are able to understand what the nature of both the cosmos and ourselves.

 

[hindupridemn]

I'm sure that Jesus was as well, it is only that Christians do not seem to have this idea. They tend to see Jesus as completely human body, flesh and blood.

My understanding is that the Oriental Orthodox Churches see Jesus as only spiritual.

 

[Madhuri]

My understanding is that the Oriental Orthodox Churches see Jesus as only spiritual.

Interesting, I've never even heard of the Oriental Orthodox Church. But it doesn't surprise me that easterners would hve this concept.

 

[Tiapan]

I have been reading the Bhagvad Gita and it's very elegant and articulate on the nature of the universe, the dealings of righetouess actions and the reality of God. However, in comparing it to the whole of Hinduism I don't understand the actual concept of God. The following is Verse 3, Chapter 10 in the Geeta when Krishna proclaimed:

''One who knows me as birthless, beginningless, and the supreme controller of all the worlds; he being undeluded among mortals is delivered from all sins.''

Now my question is , if the true reality of God in Hinduism is this description, why is there a belief that God incarnates as man onto the earth as avatars such as Raama, Vishnu, Mahesh, and even Krishna himself?

Fantasy can be transformed into any variant and is only limited by the beholders imagination. These types of contradictions are inevitable, as is the discussion of any thing "Unknowable".

Cheers

 

[Madhuri]

Fantasy can be transformed into any variant and is only limited by the beholders imagination. These types of contradictions are inevitable, as is the discussion of any thing "Unknowable".

Cheers

True, fantasy can. But we aren't talking about fantasy exactly. We are talking about a hypothetical situation -according- to certain written historical claims.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Fantasy can be transformed into any variant and is only limited by the beholders imagination. These types of contradictions are inevitable, as is the discussion of any thing "Unknowable".
Cheers

The Gita is a philosophical discourse on the meaning of life. It is very rational. I do not believe that they are contradictions, but they are written into the text to add extra explanation in to the meaning of life. It is meant to help us to harmonize many schools of thought in to one.
It is deeply admired by much of the western Intelligencia as a great discourse on life. Remember that this is one of the texts that influenced Schrodinger contributions to quantum mechanics.