• 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!

Lesser Gods

atanu

Member
Premium Member
"I am" is the one and only factual truth, more self evident than an apple on one's palm. All observations automatically prove "I Am", which however is not observable or graspable, unlike the apple.

So, when scriptures teach "I am" is the only God and all else is lesser (other gods, anya devata - in Sanskrit), IMO, they are not teaching worship of a fictional thing.

OTOH, worship-attachment to objects created due to the very existence of "I Am" is idolism.

Subject open for dissection.
 
Last edited:

Gloone

Well-Known Member
I am not real sure how you get off on "I am" being idolism.

Are you saying people are putting themselves above god by saying that? Is it bad to say "I am" because there is no other "I am" other than God. How did god ever get the title of "I am" in the first place?
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
I am not real sure how you get off on "I am" being idolism.

Are you saying people are putting themselves above god by saying that? Is it bad to say "I am" because there is no other "I am" other than God. How did god ever get the title of "I am" in the first place?

Dear Gloone

Is "I am" awareness, which is devoid of contents, same as "I am this" awareness, which has one's body as the observed contents and which automatically puts universe in opposition to oneself?
 
Last edited:

orcel

Amature Theologian
Dear Gloone

Is "I am" awareness, which is devoid of contents, same as "I am this" awareness, which has one's body as the observed contents and which automatically puts universe in opposition to oneself?

"I Am" is the name of the Hebrew God. When Moses spoke to God on Mt Sini he asked God specifically what His name is. God replied "I Am that I Am" Which in Hebrew is Yahweh.

In asking God's name Moses was asking God to define Himself for the people of Israel. God did just that, well as best as He could using human language and fitting God into human logic. God basically said, I am exactly what I am.

I think atanu's post and question is about God stating that he is greater then lesser gods. And if this shows God supporting others (non-jews) worship of non-existing gods or idols. And to atanu this is hard to meld with the reported vaules of the Jewish/Christian God.
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
***Mod Post***

Thread Moved by request to General Religious Debates.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
Dear Orcel

Your post proves to me that my communication skill in english is awful.

"I Am" is the name of the Hebrew God. When Moses spoke to God on Mt Sini he asked God specifically what His name is. God replied "I Am that I Am" Which in Hebrew is Yahweh.

In asking God's name Moses was asking God to define Himself for the people of Israel. God did just that, well as best as He could using human language and fitting God into human logic. God basically said, I am exactly what I am.

"I Am" is also the name and essence of God in Veda. But not in the way you understand in the blue highlighted part above.

In Veda, "I Am" is "A-U-M" (when seen as three states of existence: waking, dream, and sleep) and is "Om", when known as indivisible substratum that is the creator and Seer of "A-U-M" (the existence). In "Om" everthing exists but "OM" is not parted or altered because of that. This can be approximately understood when we consider that air exists within and without and is not really divided by objects that exist in it.

"I AM" is the primordial awareness which operates in all of us -- but we do not often recognise it. "I Am" is the awareness at the substratum of every existing being who says "I am this". While the "OM" (I Am) is whole, we who more easily identify with "I am this" see a fragmented world.

I think atanu's post and question is about God stating that he is greater then lesser gods. And if this shows God supporting others (non-jews) worship of non-existing gods or idols. And to atanu this is hard to meld with the reported vaules of the Jewish/Christian God.

No. The main mis-understanding has arisen here ( of course due to my lack of skill of language).

When I said "--worship-attachment to objects created due to the very existence of "I Am" is idolism--", I meant that "I AM" is that which creates and is at the source of all other perceptions.

We do not know the "I AM", which operates equally in all of us. But we worship "I am this" -- that is, we worship our body more than we love our source "I AM" . Further, we worship other objects of mind-senses, such as our attachment to forms of opposite sex, our attachement to sensual objects of taste, touch, form, hearing etc. etc.

For example, Quagmire's attachment to 5 pots of coffee every 8 hours.

We give life to the sensual objects and forget the source "I Am". This I consider to be IDOL Worship -- starting with attachment and worship of the perishable body as 'me' -- going out of the way to please the mind-body -- which is a temporary apparition at its best.

There is a verse in Brihadaraynaka Up. which says that anyone who declares "I love so and so more than my Self/Heart" will surely cause the love object to perish and the self will also perish.
 
If you read the verse in exodus literally: "I will be what I will be." I cannot fathom any descriptive quality or depiction of "G-d" here. I cannot see how this is Idolatry / idolatrous. There is no worship of any form. It is a statement.
 

mohammed_beiruti

Active Member
"I am" is the one and only factual truth, more self evident than an apple on one's palm. All observations automatically prove "I Am", which however is not observable or graspable, unlike the apple.

So, when scriptures teach "I am" is the only God and all else is lesser (other gods, anya devata - in Sanskrit), IMO, they are not teaching worship of a fictional thing.

OTOH, worship-attachment to objects created due to the very existence of "I Am" is idolism.

Subject open for dissection.

God can't be and must not be "graspable".

it contradicts with God definition.
 

AfterGlow

Invisible Puffle
"I am" is the one and only factual truth, more self evident than an apple on one's palm. All observations automatically prove "I Am", which however is not observable or graspable, unlike the apple.
I don't believe that it true. I believe "I am" to be an illusion.

So, when scriptures teach "I am" is the only God and all else is lesser (other gods, anya devata - in Sanskrit), IMO, they are not teaching worship of a fictional thing.
IMO, they are teaching the worship of an illusion.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The "lesser Gods" are as real as the apple in your palm, that is, illusory -- created by us as an artifact of our waking-state consciousness.

The Hindu expression Aham Brahmasmi -- I am (identical with) Brahman, is spoken from an expanded, "enlightened" state of consciousness, in which gods, apples and teakettles are unreal, obvious artifacts of a dream state
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
The "lesser Gods" are as real as the apple in your palm, that is, illusory -- created by us as an artifact of our waking-state consciousness.

The Hindu expression Aham Brahmasmi -- I am (identical with) Brahman, is spoken from an expanded, "enlightened" state of consciousness, in which gods, apples and teakettles are unreal, obvious artifacts of a dream state

Ahhh. This. Thanks.
 

AfterGlow

Invisible Puffle
In "I believe "I am" to be an illusion", the belief is primary or "I" is primary?

How can one proclaim "I believe" and at the same time say "I don't believe I am"?
Cupped hands can hold water, but it doesn't make them a bowl. In the same way, my mind can form beliefs, but that doesn't make it a substantive entity.
 

no-body

Well-Known Member
I am = being

in regards to lesser gods, I want to skip the middle man and speak to their supervisor
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Why would lesser gods be part of a command hierarchy?
You're patterning the heavens after terrestrial governments.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Lesser's not as great, less prominent, smaller, &c, like the lesser of two evil;s or the lesser panda.
 

Gloone

Well-Known Member
After looking back over this thread Atanu. I think you have revealed something very important and have exposed the truth for what it is.

Anyone claiming to speak for god is pretending to be something they are not. Because for "I AM" you can only speak for yourself. Not for someone or something else.

So a lesser god is... just someone trying to claim a superior status. Wow! Nothing like toppling 1,000s of years of religiosity. You know, I have herd that is how a lot of religions become myths.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
Cupped hands can hold water, but it doesn't make them a bowl. In the same way, my mind can form beliefs, but that doesn't make it a substantive entity.

I agree to a large extent, so far as the ego "i" is false. However, your example seems to indicate that two palms are joined because of the person to whom the palms belong. I believe in that. A mirage does not arise of nothing.

"I am", which is devoid of any association with any other thing is not in any one's common experience but it universally underlies all "I am this body" experience that we commonly experience. The point is that "I am" and "I am this body" are not same, the latter being a limited conditioned experience or it is an effect of universal "I Am".

Anyway. Seyorni already said that.

The "lesser Gods" are as real as the apple in your palm, that is, illusory -- created by us as an artifact of our waking-state consciousness.

The Hindu expression Aham Brahmasmi -- I am (identical with) Brahman, is spoken from an expanded, "enlightened" state of consciousness, in which gods, apples and teakettles are unreal, obvious artifacts of a dream state

So, if we consider many beliefs of science or even if we take a statement like: "I believe "I am" to be an illusion", it suggests to me an ignorance that the effect is more true than the cause. And that IMO, is belief in a lesser god -- the belief in effect and denying the origin.
 
Top