• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do you consider Ram As God

Vrindavana Das

Active Member
But looking at the other perspective, are we talking of Krishna who was born to a mortal and lived a life of a human being? Or we are talking about Krishna (the supreme lord) who has created many Krishna's during the evolution ? Even Krishna(if u r referring to one in Bhagvat Gita, etc) committed sin's(lying?)....so to compare him with Krishna(as u like to call it as true lord) is not really right...

Krishna is the Supreme Lord.
When he was born of Devaki, He appeared in the four handed Narayana form in front of Devaki & Vasudeva. Later, on their request, turned Himself into a new-born baby.

Krishna committed what sin? Could you kindly elaborate?

Its like saying I bow to Waheguru( the one & only one) but if someone call himself waheguru singh and show me the true path to lead life, is it right to call him god? Isn't he the one sent by god to show the true path....?

Waheguru, this word has come from wah+e+guru. When your guru makes you see that Lord, because that feeling cannot be described in words, all you can say is wah-e-guru (for guru was the means for your reaching that Supreme).

No human can be God. It is not right to call anyone God except God Himself. A guru is to be given the same respect of God, for he is a very dear to God. God Himself says that you should consider the spiritual master as non-differrent from Me. At the same time we must know that spiritual master is not God.

The whole idea of the true lord is amazing and can't be described even if u read vedas, guru granth sahib, quran....just impossible ..

That is why the seers, who have seen God could only say 'wah-e-guru'!

And some one question if I understand the meaning of god as per Sikhism...I would say not 100% as guru granth sahib said,,,u can keep writing about him for million of years with millions of pen, but even then u will not be able to understand his creation a bit.....

What you are saying is mentioned in the scriptures as under:

'śeṣa' ba-i saḿsārera gati nāhi āra
anantera nāme sarva-jīvera uddhāra

"Lord Anantadeva is known as Śeṣa [the unlimited end] because He ends our passage through this material world. Simply by chanting His glories, everyone can be liberated.

ananta pṛthivī-giri samudra-sahite
ye-prabhu dharena gire pālana karite

"On His head, Anantadeva sustains the entire universe, with its millions of planets containing enormous oceans and mountains.

sahasra phaṇāra eka-phaṇe 'bindu' yena
ananta vikrama, nā jānena, 'āche' hena

"He is so large and powerful that this universe rests on one of His hoods just like a drop of water. He does not know where it is.

sahasra-vadane kṛṣṇa-yaśa nirantara
gāite āchena ādi-deva mahī-dhara

"While bearing the universe on one of His hoods, Anantadeva chants the glories of Kṛṣṇa with each of His thousands of mouths.

gāyena ananta, śrī-yaśera nāhi anta
jaya-bhańga nāhi kāru, dońhe — balavanta

"Although He has been chanting the glories of Lord Kṛṣṇa since time immemorial, He has still not come to their end.
 

ratikala

Istha gosthi
friend ratikala,

just wanted to covey that if one feels a separation it means the observer is still observing.

*I* (talking about my self ) ... think I said Difference , .... allthough sepperation is often imputed but in a different context ! .... I am talking about realization ...
The realization of oneness dispels duality even though they remain two in appearances which you are referring to.
that apperance of duality is only temporary ....

there is a *you* that is realizing oneness , and a *me* who is realizing inconceivable oneness and difference .

both of which dispell duality in the sence you confer .

and even by that realization .....
we are each only realizing a minute portion of the potency of the superme :D

Personal understanding is referring to or speaking thus too goes to project a duality in understanding. Yes, it is only a personal understanding which may not be so in everyday life. Over time am sure that too will get rectified.

Love & rgds
speaking thus goes to project duality ?

conventionaly? ... yes ! , ultimately ? no ! :D


yes, we will all get there some day , we will all realize the supreme , and our personal beings will be as grains of sand ... so minute in their un realized state ... and in our realized state we will realize the supreme to be greater still and our selves to be simply a portion of the whole , ....Inconceivable onenes ...and difference
 

Gurtej

Member
Krishna is the Supreme Lord.
When he was born of Devaki, He appeared in the four handed Narayana form in front of Devaki & Vasudeva. Later, on their request, turned Himself into a new-born baby.

Dear Sir, this sounds good, but I don't believe in this. But u can if u want, no hard feelings.


Vrindavana Das says"

Waheguru, this word has come from wah+e+guru. When your guru makes you see that Lord, because that feeling cannot be described in words, all you can say is wah-e-guru (for guru was the means for your reaching that Supreme).



No human can be God. It is not right to call anyone God except God Himself. A guru is to be given the same respect of God, for he is a very dear to God. God Himself says that you should consider the spiritual master as non-differrent from Me. At the same time we must know that spiritual master is not God.[/QUOTE]

Answer:

No Sir, this is wrong. A guru word is the way to achieve the supreme lord. No where in Sikhism it says that "I should consider spiritual master as non different to me". Sikhi is very clear that no one and it focus that no one can come even near to the true lord. He is the master to control the world and enjoi it from his throne.

Guru Gobind Says:

Paa(n)-i gahay jab tay tumray tab tay kou aa(n)kh taray nahee aanyo.
Raam raheem puraan kuraan anayk kahai mat ayk na maanyo.
"O God ! the day when I caught hold of your feet, I do not bring anyone else under my sight; none other is liked by me now; the Puranas and the Quran try to know Thee by the names of Ram and Rahim and talk about you through several stories, but I do not accept any one religion."

isMimRiq swsqR byd sBY bhu Byd khY hm eyk n jwnXo ]
sRI Aispwn ikRpw qumrI kir mY n khXo sB qoih bKwnXo ]863]
Si(n)mrit shaastra bayd sabhai bahu bhayd kahai ham ayk na jaanyo.
Sri asipaan kripaa tumree kar mai na kahyo sabh tohi bakhaanyo. (863)
"The Simritis, Shastras and Vedas describe several mysteries of yours, but I do not agree with any of them. O sword-wielder God! This all has been described by Thy Grace, what power can I have to write all this? (863)"

dohrw ]
Dohraa

sgl duAwr kau Cwif kY ghXo quhwro duAwr ]
bWih ghy kI lwj Ais goibMd dws quhwr ]864]
Sagal duaar kau chhaad(i) kai gahyo tuhaaro duaar.
Ba(n)hi gahay kee laaj as gobind daas tuhaar. (864)
"O Lord ! I have forsaken all other doors and have caught hold of only Thy door. O Lord ! Thou has caught hold of my arm; I, Govind, am Thy serf, kindly take (care of me and) protect my honour. (864)"




What you are saying is mentioned in the scriptures as under:[/QUOTE said:
'śeṣa' ba-i saḿsārera gati nāhi āra
anantera nāme sarva-jīvera uddhāra

"Lord Anantadeva is known as Śeṣa [the unlimited end] because He ends our passage through this material world. Simply by chanting His glories, everyone can be liberated.

ananta pṛthivī-giri samudra-sahite
ye-prabhu dharena gire pālana karite

"On His head, Anantadeva sustains the entire universe, with its millions of planets containing enormous oceans and mountains.

sahasra phaṇāra eka-phaṇe 'bindu' yena
ananta vikrama, nā jānena, 'āche' hena

"He is so large and powerful that this universe rests on one of His hoods just like a drop of water. He does not know where it is.

sahasra-vadane kṛṣṇa-yaśa nirantara
gāite āchena ādi-deva mahī-dhara

"While bearing the universe on one of His hoods, Anantadeva chants the glories of Kṛṣṇa with each of His thousands of mouths.

gāyena ananta, śrī-yaśera nāhi anta
jaya-bhańga nāhi kāru, dońhe — balavanta

"Although He has been chanting the glories of Lord Kṛṣṇa since time immemorial, He has still not come to their end.

By looking at the above, none of these quotes justify the Shri Krishna was a lord abd also for my knowledge can anyone please direct me to the quotes in Bhagwat Gita where Shree Krishna actually says that he is the supreme lord? From my understanding, and from what I heared some Hindu Scholars condemn the idea of labelling Shri Krishna as the supreme lord...I may be wrong but if u can provide me the quotes then I will dig deeper.

Thanks and regards.
 
Last edited:

zenzero

Its only a Label
Friend Gurtej,

A guru word is the way to achieve the supreme lord. No where in Sikhism it says that "I should consider spiritual master as non different to me". Sikhi is very clear that no one and it focus that no one can come even near to the true lord. He is the master to control the world and enjoi it from his throne.

Can only state that unless one merges with THAT universal; guru's words can never be understood as it was understood literally then we would have found many many enlightened/ buddhas/gurus on earth.

Arguments are like reactions which are of the mind and transcending the mind is religion.

Love & rgds
 

Vrindavana Das

Active Member
Dear Sir, this sounds good, but I don't believe in this. But u can if u want, no hard feelings.

It is all right. You can believe what you think is right. However, just for the record, below is a verse from Srimad Bhagavatam giving description of how Krishna appeared to Devaki & Vasudeva.

tam adbhutaḿ bālakam ambujekṣaṇaḿ
catur-bhujaḿ śańkha-gadādy-udāyudham
śrīvatsa-lakṣmaḿ gala-śobhi-kaustubhaḿ
pītāmbaraḿ sāndra-payoda-saubhagam
mahārha-vaidūrya-kirīṭa-kuṇḍala-
tviṣā pariṣvakta-sahasra-kuntalam
uddāma-kāñcy-ańgada-kańkaṇādibhir
virocamānaḿ vasudeva aikṣata​

Vasudeva then saw the newborn child, who had very wonderful lotuslike eyes and who bore in His four hands the four weapons śańkha, cakra, gadā and padma. On His chest was the mark of Śrīvatsa and on His neck the brilliant Kaustubha gem. Dressed in yellow, His body blackish like a dense cloud, His scattered hair fully grown, and His helmet and earrings sparkling uncommonly with the valuable gem Vaidūrya, the child, decorated with a brilliant belt, armlets, bangles and other ornaments, appeared very wonderful.S.B. 10.3.9-10

No Sir, this is wrong. A guru word is the way to achieve the supreme lord.

In Guru Granth Sahib Ji it is written that Guru bina gati sambhav nahi bhai. Meaning - except for taking the shelter of a Guru, there is no deliverance. Please check.

No where in Sikhism it says that "I should consider spiritual master as non different to me". Sikhi is very clear that no one and it focus that no one can come even near to the true lord. He is the master to control the world and enjoi it from his throne.

Seems to me that you have not understood what I am saying. I said - no one is equal to God. However, God says that one should give the same RESPECT to Guru as he gives to God.

Guru Gobind Says:

"O God ! the day when I caught hold of your feet, I do not bring anyone else under my sight; none other is liked by me now; the Puranas and the Quran try to know Thee by the names of Ram and Rahim and talk about you through several stories, but I do not accept any one religion."

"The Simritis, Shastras and Vedas describe several mysteries of yours, but I do not agree with any of them. O sword-wielder God! This all has been described by Thy Grace, what power can I have to write all this? (863)"

"O Lord ! I have forsaken all other doors and have caught hold of only Thy door. O Lord ! Thou has caught hold of my arm; I, Govind, am Thy serf, kindly take (care of me and) protect my honour. (864)"

What all you have given above is true. However, I am unable to understand 'why' you have given this. I mean the reason for giving this is unclear to me.

By looking at the above, none of these quotes justify the Shri Krishna was a lord abd also for my knowledge can anyone please direct me to the quotes in Bhagwat Gita where Shree Krishna actually says that he is the supreme lord? From my understanding, and from what I heared some Hindu Scholars condemn the idea of labelling Shri Krishna as the supreme lord...I may be wrong but if u can provide me the quotes then I will dig deeper.

Thanks and regards.

Here are some quotes stating Krishna is Supreme Lord:

Lord Bramha in Bramha-Samhita [5.1] says:

isvarah paramah krishnah
sac-cid-ananda-vigrahah
anadir adir govindah​

"'Krishna, known as Govinda, is the supreme controller. He has an eternal, blissful, spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin, for He is the prime cause of all causes.'

In Bhagvad Gita, Krishna declares:

bhoktaram yajna-tapasam
sarva-loka-mahesvaram
suhrdam sarva-bhutanam
jnatva mam santim rcchati​

The sages, knowing Me as the ultimate purpose of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attain peace from the pangs of material miseries. B.G. [5.29]

Adi Shankaracharya, has said:

bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ
bhaja govindaṁ mūḍha-mate
prāpte sannihite kāla maraṇe
na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñ-karaṇe​

Worship Govinda, worship Govinda, worship Govinda, O fool! The rules of grammar will not save you at the time of your death. - SaNkAracArya.
 

Gurtej

Member
Friend Gurtej,



Can only state that unless one merges with THAT universal; guru's words can never be understood as it was understood literally then we would have found many many enlightened/ buddhas/gurus on earth.

Arguments are like reactions which are of the mind and transcending the mind is religion.

Love & rgds

Dear Zen,

Yes agree with it, but my guru words r a way to attain the true universal guru. So there is clearly a distinction, isn't it.
 

Gurtej

Member
Vrindavana Das"It is all right. You can believe what you think is right. However, just for the record, below is a verse from Srimad Bhagavatam giving description of how Krishna appeared to Devaki & Vasudeva.

tam adbhutaḿ bālakam ambujekṣaṇaḿ
catur-bhujaḿ śańkha-gadādy-udāyudham
śrīvatsa-lakṣmaḿ gala-śobhi-kaustubhaḿ
pītāmbaraḿ sāndra-payoda-saubhagam
mahārha-vaidūrya-kirīṭa-kuṇḍala-
tviṣā pariṣvakta-sahasra-kuntalam
uddāma-kāñcy-ańgada-kańkaṇādibhir
virocamānaḿ vasudeva aikṣata​

Vasudeva then saw the newborn child, who had very wonderful lotuslike eyes and who bore in His four hands the four weapons śańkha, cakra, gadā and padma. On His chest was the mark of Śrīvatsa and on His neck the brilliant Kaustubha gem. Dressed in yellow, His body blackish like a dense cloud, His scattered hair fully grown, and His helmet and earrings sparkling uncommonly with the valuable gem Vaidūrya, the child, decorated with a brilliant belt, armlets, bangles and other ornaments, appeared very wonderful.S.B. 10.3.9-10

Answer or reply:

Ok thanks, but can't we adore the amazing game of the true lord here who sent Krishna is this amazing form....Anyway I will research a bit on it too...

In Guru Granth Sahib Ji it is written that Guru bina gati sambhav nahi bhai. Meaning - except for taking the shelter of a Guru, there is no deliverance. Please check.

Answer or reply:

Yes no arguments, but from my understanding this can mean two things:

1) With the shelter of the guru( the only one) or
2) With the shelter(words) of the guru...which again means there is a clear distinction between the guru sent to earth to spread the true message to attain the true guru...

Please quote the page number and I will try to explain throughly



Seems to me that you have not understood what I am saying. I said - no one is equal to God. However, God says that one should give the same RESPECT to Guru as he gives to God.

Answer or reply:

Ok respect wise I agree we should give same respect, however again the distinction is still there....between the god and the guru and who shall I bow to ? The true god or the guru....Sikhi tells me to bow to the true god and no one else and it kinda makes sense and this is what guru's taught through their words...

What all you have given above is true. However, I am unable to understand 'why' you have given this. I mean the reason for giving this is unclear to me.

This was only given to make clear distinction that in Sikhi, there are 1000's to avatars but only one lord who I bow to...

Here are some quotes stating Krishna is Supreme Lord:

Lord Bramha in Bramha-Samhita [5.1] says:

isvarah paramah krishnah
sac-cid-ananda-vigrahah
anadir adir govindah​

"'Krishna, known as Govinda, is the supreme controller. He has an eternal, blissful, spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin, for He is the prime cause of all causes.'

In Bhagvad Gita, Krishna declares:

bhoktaram yajna-tapasam
sarva-loka-mahesvaram
suhrdam sarva-bhutanam
jnatva mam santim rcchati​

The sages, knowing Me as the ultimate purpose of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attain peace from the pangs of material miseries. B.G. [5.29]

Adi Shankaracharya, has said:

bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ
bhaja govindaṁ mūḍha-mate
prāpte sannihite kāla maraṇe
na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñ-karaṇe​

Worship Govinda, worship Govinda, worship Govinda, O fool! The rules of grammar will not save you at the time of your death. - SaNkAracArya.[/QUOTE]

Answer or reply:

I will research a bit on these as well, please gime some time
 
Last edited:

zenzero

Its only a Label

Vrindavana Das

Active Member
Yes no arguments, but from my understanding this can mean two things:

1) With the shelter of the guru( the only one) or
2) With the shelter(words) of the guru...which again means there is a clear distinction between the guru sent to earth to spread the true message to attain the true guru...

Please quote the page number and I will try to explain throughly

It means exactly what it says. Please do not interpret meanings in what is written. If you are not sure of the meaning, ask someone who knows. That is why Guru is needed (the only one). If you take shelter of the (words) of Guru, you may interpret the wrong meaning. This could spoil your spiritual progress.

Ok respect wise I agree we should give same respect, however again the distinction is still there....between the god and the guru and who shall I bow to ? The true god or the guru....Sikhi tells me to bow to the true god and no one else and it kinda makes sense and this is what guru's taught through their words...

Guru says you bow to God.
God says you bow to Guru.
What will you do?

To please God, you must bow to Guru. To please Guru, you must bow to God.

You must understand the spirit (essence) of what is being said. For this, you need to take shelter of Guru (the only one), who can teach you and clarify your doubts.
 

Gurtej

Member
Vrindavana Das;]It means exactly what it says. Please do not interpret meanings in what is written. If you are not sure of the meaning, ask someone who knows. That is why Guru is needed (the only one). If you take shelter of the (words) of Guru, you may interpret the wrong meaning. This could spoil your spiritual progress.

Answer: I am not trying to interpret the meaning, I only want you to quote where its written in Guru Granth Sahib?I have asked to provide me the page reference where the above is said in Guru Ranth sahib. If you can't then I would assume that you are making up things but if you can then I will try provide more information for your understanding.


Guru says you bow to God.
God says you bow to Guru.
What will you do?


To please God, you must bow to Guru. To please Guru, you must bow to God.

Answer:

God never says bow to Guru and not even guru says bow to him...please let me know where r u getting this in Guru Granth sahib cause I have never come across something like this. It may be written in the vedas but not in Sikhism or even Islam. Muslims r not suppose to bow to Prophet Mohammad let alone any one else in their culture...I would request that you come up with quotes when trying to justify something is written in holy texts, otherwise do ur research before saying anything. Thanks

You must understand the spirit (essence) of what is being said. For this, you need to take shelter of Guru (the only one), who can teach you and clarify your doubts.

Agree
 

Gurtej

Member
Vrindavana Das"In Guru Granth Sahib Ji it is written that Guru bina gati sambhav nahi bhai. Meaning - except for taking the shelter of a Guru, there is no deliverance. Please check.

ime of your death. - SaNkAracArya.

Answer or reply:

Dear , Please provide me the page reference where its written in Guru Granth Sahib....
 

Madhuri

RF Goddess
Staff member
Premium Member
So do u agree with all the things that Krishna did in his life time or even in Mahabharat? If so then, I don't need to say anything, may be my definition of god is completely different to urs....no trying to offend u

Of course I agree with what he did. And of course I assume that you do not understand the meaning behind those things. You can't judge Krishna without in depth study of this God-concept.
 

Vrindavana Das

Active Member
I am not trying to interpret the meaning, I only want you to quote where its written in Guru Granth Sahib?I have asked to provide me the page reference where the above is said in Guru Ranth sahib. If you can't then I would assume that you are making up things but if you can then I will try provide more information for your understanding.

This is there in Guru Granth Sahib Ji. I do not know where exactly though. I am not making anything up. It is you my friend, who should do some effort and dig it out, if you are serious.

God never says bow to Guru and not even guru says bow to him...please let me know where r u getting this in Guru Granth sahib cause I have never come across something like this. It may be written in the vedas but not in Sikhism or even Islam. Muslims r not suppose to bow to Prophet Mohammad let alone any one else in their culture...I would request that you come up with quotes when trying to justify something is written in holy texts, otherwise do ur research before saying anything. Thanks

Just one example:

tad viddhi praṇipātena
paripraśnena sevayā
upadekṣyanti te jñānaḿ
jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ​

Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth.B.G. [4.34]
You must understand the spirit (essence) of what is being said. For this, you need to take shelter of Guru (the only one), who can teach you and clarify your doubts.
 
Last edited:

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
I am a Sikh and often debating some fellow hindus on their belief, they always say bhagwan Ram Chander. Now my questions is what exactly is the definition of god according to vedas...and please answer the below:

1) Does Veda Say that Sri Ram is a god?

I don't think Rama is talked about in the Vedas. This is the confusion. The Vedas teaches many differing views. It teaches both Monism and Monotheism. There is one Hymn Rig Veda 10.8.125 That a woman sage calls herself God and that She is in everything and everywhere.

2) Doesn't Vedas say that God has no image, no face etc?

Some places it says that. There are other places that talk about sages who make Murti's for a living. Many differing ideas. It is a common belief in Hinduism that one view or a single belief system would not be good for all people. People have differing tastes and are at different stages of development.

3) What exactly Sri Ram has done to be classified as god? From my understanding he didn't exactly provided any teachings, nor did he gave away his life for a very noble cause?From my side, even after doing that no one can be classified as a god...

Rama is an Avatar who came to earth to teach Dharma. Its also ok not to believe. In one text some rishi's did not believe Rama was an Avatar. Rama still saw them as sages. He treated them with the highest respect.

4) He Killed Ravan who in eyes of his people was one of the greatest leader for them....and in all honesty even he was a bad person, killing him would not really justify rama position as a god.

Ravana's army traveled around India throwing blood and filth into the homa of sages. Ravana was hurting all but his own people. Rama came to remove this evil.

5) Sita had to go under Sati test because he heared something about her, well a god would know a bit better right?

Rama loved Sita she was his very life. Yet, he gave her up for his subjects. He gave up his kingdom, wife, father, mother his all for Dharma. I believe that is the teaching of the Ramayana.

Am I right to think that he was one of a great king but comparing him to the level of prophet or a guru let alone god is not really making sense to me unless you can tell me of his deeds and teachings....

Then that is what you should believe. Is not this the path of a Sikh?
 

zenzero

Its only a Label
Friends,

Our friend Gurtej is unable to fathom that the whole existence is consciousness in different forms or no-forms and realizing THAT is what dharma is all about. Till the realization is reached the mind will create dualities of all things seen or unseen and friend Gurtej is in that state where for him night is night [darkness/satan/etc] and day is light/God/etc] forgetting that day and night are not separate and can never stand alone. They are together as a unit.
Till realization happens which is again individual's own effortless effort/karma as there are no others as such except consciousness.

Love & rgds
 

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
I am a Sikh and often debating some fellow hindus on their belief, they always say bhagwan Ram Chander. Now my questions is what exactly is the definition of god according to vedas...and please answer the below:

1) Does Veda Say that Sri Ram is a god?
2) Doesn't Vedas say that God has no image, no face etc?
3) What exactly Sri Ram has done to be classified as god? From my understanding he didn't exactly provided any teachings, nor did he gave away his life for a very noble cause?From my side, even after doing that no one can be classified as a god...
4) He Killed Ravan who in eyes of his people was one of the greatest leader for them....and in all honesty even he was a bad person, killing him would not really justify rama position as a god.
5) Sita had to go under Sati test because he heared something about her, well a god would know a bit better right?

Am I right to think that he was one of a great king but comparing him to the level of prophet or a guru let alone god is not really making sense to me unless you can tell me of his deeds and teachings....

Also please tell me the texts from where you get your information from...Thanks

I dont think Arya Veer Shri Ram is Ishwar, he was a realized Atman, come to bring us back to Dharmah.

I parise (pooj) Ary Veer Shri Ram not because i think he is Ishwar, but to become like him and be with Ishwar.
 

Vrindavana Das

Active Member
Now my questions is what exactly is the definition of god according to vedas...and please answer the below:

The word bhagavān is explained by Parāśara Muni: one who is full in six opulences, who has full strength, full fame, wealth, knowledge, beauty and renunciation, is Bhagavān, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. While Kṛṣṇa was present on this earth, He displayed all six opulences. Therefore great sages like Parāśara Muni have all accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Therefore it is concluded in the Brahma-saṁhitā by Lord Brahmā himself that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. No one is equal to or above Him. He is the primeval Lord, or Bhagavān, known as Govinda, and He is the supreme cause of all causes:

īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
anādir ādir govindaḥ
sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam​

"There are many personalities possessing the qualities of Bhagavān, but Kṛṣṇa is the supreme because none can excel Him. He is the Supreme Person, and His body is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. He is the primeval Lord Govinda and the cause of all causes." (Brahma-saṁhitā 5.1)

1) Does Veda Say that Sri Ram is a god?

Sri Rama is an expansion of Supreme Lord - Krishna. It is like lighting one candle from another. The original candle is Krishna and the other candle is Lord Rama. Both are God. However, Krishna is the Supreme Lord (as also mentioned in the verse above by Lord Bramha).

2) Doesn't Vedas say that God has no image, no face etc?

The Formless Light you are referring to is called Brahm Jyoti. Many persons say this light is God, therefore God is formless, has no image etc.

This Brahm Jyoti is the light coming out from the body of God. Source of this Light is a person - the Supreme Personality of Godhead - Krishna.

The aim of Vedas is to know God and to engage in His loving devotional service - bhakti.

The same is declared in the Bhagvad Gita by Krishna as under:

sarvasya cāhaḿ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo
mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaḿ ca
vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva cāham​

I am seated in everyone's heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. By all the Vedas, I am to be known. Indeed, I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.[B.G. 15.15]

3) What exactly Sri Ram has done to be classified as god? From my understanding he didn't exactly provided any teachings, nor did he gave away his life for a very noble cause?From my side, even after doing that no one can be classified as a god...

In Bhagvad Gita, Krishna declares:

yadā yadā hi dharmasya
glānir bhavati bhārata
abhyutthānam adharmasya
tadātmānaḿ sṛjāmy aham​

Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion — at that time I descend Myself. [B.G. 4.7]

paritrāṇāya sādhūnāḿ
vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām
dharma-saḿsthāpanārthāya
sambhavāmi yuge yuge​

To deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I Myself appear, millennium after millennium.[B.G. 4.8]

This is the perspective from which you should try and understand the advent and pastimes of Lord Rama.

Lord Ram is God. You should not doubt this. He played the pastime of a human 'Maryada Purushottam' to please and attract the hearts of His devotees and to kill the miscreants - like Ravana.

4) He Killed Ravan who in eyes of his people was one of the greatest leader for them....and in all honesty even he was a bad person, killing him would not really justify rama position as a god.

Ravana was a scholar and a greatly learned man. He knew that Lord Rama is God. He also knew that he cannot worship God with his 'tamasi' body & nature, which is full of ignorance (like eating flesh, womanizing, wine etc.). He knew that if he kidnaps the wife of Ram - Sita, Rama will come and kill him. He wanted to die from the hands of Rama so that he gets liberation (moksha). Also, he got so many demonic persons (asuras) killed by Lord Rama and in the Lord's presence because all of them too would get liberation.

5) Sita had to go under Sati test because he heared something about her, well a god would know a bit better right?

You are right. God does know better.

Lord Rama knew that Ravana will come to kidnap Sita. Thus, He had handed over Sita to Fire God - 'Agni'. Agni made an exact replica of Sita and gave to Lord Rama. It is this fake Sita that Ravana kidnapped (thinking her to be original Sita). After killing Ravana, to take back the original Sita, Lord Rama played the pastime of putting her to test (agni-pariksha). This way, he gave back the fake Sita to Agni and took from him the original Sita.

Am I right to think that he was one of a great king but comparing him to the level of prophet or a guru let alone god is not really making sense to me unless you can tell me of his deeds and teachings....

Do you mean the scriptures, all the great sages - Rishis, Munis, all of India who worship Lord Rama as God are fools?!! Do you know that Maharishi Valmiki wrote Ramayan even before Lord Rama came. Sorry friend, what you are saying is an absolutely incorrect understanding.
 
Last edited:

Gurtej

Member
Vrindavana Das;2897723]The word bhagavān is explained by Parāśara Muni: one who is full in six opulences, who has full strength, full fame, wealth, knowledge, beauty and renunciation, is Bhagavān, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. While Kṛṣṇa was present on this earth, He displayed all six opulences. Therefore great sages like Parāśara Muni have all accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Therefore it is concluded in the Brahma-saṁhitā by Lord Brahmā himself that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. No one is equal to or above Him. He is the primeval Lord, or Bhagavān, known as Govinda, and He is the supreme cause of all causes:

īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
anādir ādir govindaḥ
sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam​

"There are many personalities possessing the qualities of Bhagavān, but Kṛṣṇa is the supreme because none can excel Him. He is the Supreme Person, and His body is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. He is the primeval Lord Govinda and the cause of all causes." (Brahma-saṁhitā 5.1)



Sri Rama is an expansion of Supreme Lord - Krishna. It is like lighting one candle from another. The original candle is Krishna and the other candle is Lord Rama. Both are God. However, Krishna is the Supreme Lord (as also mentioned in the verse above by Lord Bramha).


Dear Friend, a lot of Scholars( Hindus) out there who don't agree with Rama or Krishna being god, True they are avatars but not got , I think there is a difference. And going by what I can read in this forum, not every hindu believe in Rama or Krishna although they respect him....

Krishna teachings are in Holy Gita but some twist the meanings, but what did Rama preach?And where his teachings r recorded? And by who a third person? Before or after his life? Thing I don't understand is where Vedas say that God can't be born, then what different in case of the avatars....Some people will say that you need to look into a broader perspective but the whole idea of God is so huge that non e can explain it. Its true people will have their own faith but then again they are not following the fundamentals or Vedas but their own made agenda.

Lets say Satya Sai Baba or Sai baba, some people do consider them as God, is this right?

The Formless Light you are referring to is called Brahm Jyoti. Many persons say this light is God, therefore God is formless, has no image etc.

This Brahm Jyoti is the light coming out from the body of God. Source of this Light is a person - the Supreme Personality of Godhead - Krishna.

The aim of Vedas is to know God and to engage in His loving devotional service - bhakti.

The same is declared in the Bhagvad Gita by Krishna as under:

sarvasya cāhaḿ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo
mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaḿ ca
vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva cāham​

I am seated in everyone's heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. By all the Vedas, I am to be known. Indeed, I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.[B.G. 15.15]



In Bhagvad Gita, Krishna declares:

yadā yadā hi dharmasya
glānir bhavati bhārata
abhyutthānam adharmasya
tadātmānaḿ sṛjāmy aham​

Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion — at that time I descend Myself. [B.G. 4.7]

paritrāṇāya sādhūnāḿ
vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām
dharma-saḿsthāpanārthāya
sambhavāmi yuge yuge​

To deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I Myself appear, millennium after millennium.[B.G. 4.8]

This is the perspective from which you should try and understand the advent and pastimes of Lord Rama.

Lord Ram is God. You should not doubt this. He played the pastime of a human 'Maryada Purushottam' to please and attract the hearts of His devotees and to kill the miscreants - like Ravana.



Ravana was a scholar and a greatly learned man. He knew that Lord Rama is God. He also knew that he cannot worship God with his 'tamasi' body & nature, which is full of ignorance (like eating flesh, womanizing, wine etc.). He knew that if he kidnaps the wife of Ram - Sita, Rama will come and kill him. He wanted to die from the hands of Rama so that he gets liberation (moksha). Also, he got so many demonic persons (asuras) killed by Lord Rama and in the Lord's presence because all of them too would get liberation.

To say Rama was god, I just need some justification, just because some people believe it doesn't make it right. I am doing more research in the concept of God in Hinduism and will come back with more questions. from what I read in a lot of articles, it seems to me people are just trying to justify the god tag for Rama and Krishna cause otherwise it hurts their feelings which is understandable.


You are right. God does know better.

Lord Rama knew that Ravana will come to kidnap Sita. Thus, He had handed over Sita to Fire God - 'Agni'. Agni made an exact replica of Sita and gave to Lord Rama. It is this fake Sita that Ravana kidnapped (thinking her to be original Sita). After killing Ravana, to take back the original Sita, Lord Rama played the pastime of putting her to test (agni-pariksha). This way, he gave back the fake Sita to Agni and took from him the original Sita.


Do you mean the scriptures, all the great sages - Rishis, Munis, all of India who worship Lord Rama as God are fools?!! Do you know that Maharishi Valmiki wrote Ramayan even before Lord Rama came. Sorry friend, what you are saying is an absolutely incorrect understanding.[/QUOTE]

As I said, I will post some quotes from majority of scriptures (Vedas, Guru Granth) that talks about god and what it means....lets c but I need some time....


Thanks
 
Top