so many gods?

[Me Myself]

I'm not sure I understand this...
Could you elaborate?

Well, I am not sure how but let me try:

Spirits or beings of pure energy, not necesarily physical, exist. Our bodies have and aura and chakras, this are mad of subtle energy or "prana". While we as material beings have pranic bodies, gods like Shiva, Vishnu Brahma or the All, Brahman, can manifest themselves in purely pranic ways that do not have a material form (flesh, bone).

like the kind of form we wassume when we go to the heavens, that is not physical but pranic, or spiritual. Made purely out of spirit, energy, prana or some more subtle way of consciousness.

Also I wouldn´t limit their "heavens" or lokas to the material world at all. I would be curious if the exist in a "place" in the material world... though I honestly doubt it.

I believe that all beings that are somehow enlightened are one with brahaman or the All and any personality it may want to manifest. There is no personality that does not pass I would think, but at the same time, maybe no personality ever really passes, but just experience different states of peace or lack of peace.

So we are all the same, part of god. At the same time, all Gods are the same, fullfiling their cosmic role in perfect comprehension and armony with the ALL.

It´s a too wordy matter, I truly apologize if you felt I didn´t say anything particular

 

[Madhuri]

According to Hinduism, God never manifests his form in a material body. Even the avatars are considered to be spirit bodies, where apparently Maya works her magic to allow ordinary humans to see a physical form.

Also the gods and heavens are considered astral. They are not material.

Did you think that I was implying that Garbhodaksayi Vishnu is a material form? This is not what I meant. It is a spiritual form.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

According to Hinduism, God never manifests his form in a material body. Even the avatars are considered to be spirit bodies, where apparently Maya works her magic to allow ordinary humans to see a physical form.

I would not say that is a over all Hindu belief, more of a modern Vaishnava view. Smarta, Shakta and Saivite don't except this view for many reasons.

 

[Madhuri]

I would not say that is a over all Hindu belief, more of a modern Vaishnava view. Smarta, Shakta and Saivite don't except this view for many reasons.

I'd love to know more. I am of course mostly familiar with modern Vaishnava views.

 

[Me Myself]

According to Hinduism, God never manifests his form in a material body. Even the avatars are considered to be spirit bodies, where apparently Maya works her magic to allow ordinary humans to see a physical form.

Also the gods and heavens are considered astral. They are not material.

Did you think that I was implying that Garbhodaksayi Vishnu is a material form? This is not what I meant. It is a spiritual form.

I wasn´t totaly sure, maybe I was just confused in the way I interpreted when you said that the "g"ods of the trimurti are limited to the material universe.

I didn´t know Krishna´s body was meant to be "less" flesh and bone than regular bodies

 

[Me Myself]

I would not say that is a over all Hindu belief, more of a modern Vaishnava view. Smarta, Shakta and Saivite don't except this view for many reasons.

Elaborate! :clap2:

 

[Madhuri]

I wasn´t totaly sure, maybe I was just confused in the way I interpreted when you said that the "g"ods of the trimurti are limited to the material universe.

The gods represent different aspects of God. They are not the 'complete' form of God. So when God expands itself for different roles, a particular personality is manifest that represents that aspect. For the purpose of creating the material universe and populating them, the 3 forms are manifest; Brahma, (G)Vishnu and (Shambhu)Shiva. So yes, these particular manifestations of God are manifest specifically in relations to the creation, maintenance and destruction of the material universes. But they are not material bodies.

Now I wrote all that assuming it is what you had confusion with. I could still be misunderstanding your response (forgive me for being slow!)

 

[Me Myself]

The gods represent different aspects of God. They are not the 'complete' form of God. So when God expands itself for different roles, a particular personality is manifest that represents that aspect. For the purpose of creating the material universe and populating them, the 3 forms are manifest; Brahma, (G)Vishnu and (Shambhu)Shiva. So yes, these particular manifestations of God are manifest specifically in relations to the creation, maintenance and destruction of the material universes. But they are not material bodies.

Now I wrote all that assuming it is what you had confusion with. I could still be misunderstanding your response (forgive me for being slow!)

It was . You are cool, it´s just wordy matters :cover:

Idk, I think the "purpose" of the trimurti trascends only ruling the physical, but that is only something very individual.

The way I personaly see it, the trimurti are still a part of God when "they are not" . Shiva is Shiva in all the universes. In this subjecctsa when they get this big and subjective I think many hindu schools have very different perspectives, and I don´t have any that is set in stone.

Thanks for clarifications

 

[Madhuri]

The way I personaly see it, the trimurti are still a part of God when "they are not" . Shiva is Shiva in all the universes. In this subjecctsa when they get this big and subjective I think many hindu schools have very different perspectives, and I don´t have any that is set in stone.

Absolutely. But when the universes are destroyed, when the cycle is complete, they, along with all things, retract into the 'body' of God. So the form is different. They no longer manifest as three until the new creation cycle.

You are right about the difference of perspectives. I don't even know if Shaivites believe in the trimurti

 

[Vinayaka]

Absolutely. But when the universes are destroyed, when the cycle is complete, they, along with all things, retract into the 'body' of God. So the form is different. They no longer manifest as three until the new creation cycle.

You are right about the difference of perspectives. I don't even know if Shaivites believe in the trimurti

Generally Saivites don't believe in a trimurti separate form Siva, but it's all within Siva, so as powers of Siva, sure. The major difference in common belief, I believe, is we Saivas definitely don't believe in the concept of avatar.

 

[Madhuri]

Generally Saivites don't believe in a trimurti separate form Siva, but it's all within Siva, so as powers of Siva, sure. The major difference in common belief, I believe, is we Saivas definitely don't believe in the concept of avatar.

Which scripture/s does the Saivite concept of trimurti taken from?
I know that a lot of Vaishnava beliefs come from the Puranas.

 

[Vinayaka]

Which scripture/s does the Saivite concept of trimurti taken from?
I know that a lot of Vaishnava beliefs come from the Puranas.

No idea ... I'm not a scripture kind of guy ... I just know a bhajan that goes, Brahma, Vishnu, Sadashiva... her's a link .. nice song http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofa20Pe9at8 I take no beliefs from Puranas, and basically they aren't significant scripture to me at all. But there are 6 different main schools within Saivism.

 

[Madhuri]

No idea ... I'm not a scripture kind of guy ... I just know a bhajan that goes, Brahma, Vishnu, Sadashiva... I take no beliefs from Puranas, and basically they aren't significant scripture to me at all. But there are 6 different main schools within Saivism.

I wonder if the trimurti is mentioned in actual Veda and not just the Puranas. I'm having difficulty finding online information.

 

[zenzero]

Friend SA,

so all are like fingers point to Brahman..the ultimately reality or at least source of all reality.

Yes, It is both the source and Reality in ITSELF.
Mostly even those of the path forget that TRUTH is not only VOID but FORMS too!
Both forms and no-forms make it a *WHOLE*.

Love & rgds

 

[Jainarayan]

Here's a neat little diagram of how Vaishnavas view the relationship between Krishna as the Supreme Brahman, and then as Vishnu, and then as an avatar of Vishnu.

 

[Ekanta]

My understanding...



The christian trinity always confused me, till I read this explanation:

1. The holy spirit = brahman (holy means separate/distinct, brahman or atman is in reality not mixed with maya, it being real, eternal, unchanging etc, which creation is not)
2. The father = Ishvara (brahman as the all knowing lord, in christianity the father is all knowing and for example... he alone knows the date of judgment day)
3. The son = Jiva (brahman as the individual, be it an ordinary human or Jesus, deluded or one with the father)

About the hindu gods (devas)... they are like angels... guardians of creation or the organism. The demons/asuras are those senses/mind functions led astray and devas/angels are those senses/mind functions which are not led astray.

Hence a human can be either divine or demonic in nature.

In the Gita, Krishna praises those he calls "my devotees". I.e. those who worship either God with characteristics (father/Ishvara) or God without characteristics (holy spirit/brahman). Those who worship the devas/angels simply for benefits in this world or for attaining temporary enjoyment in heaven are not included here. You must worship the one God either with or without form/characteristics.

Ok lets try this, comments welcome...

 

[zenzero]

Friend Ekanta,

When is one ekanta ?
what is worship?
perosnal understanding:
when the worshipper and the worshipped becomes one; one is in the state of ekanta!
In ekanta therefore there is no Krishna or Brahman or anyone else.

over to you!
Love & rgds

 

[Ekanta]

Hello zenzero and the rest. First I didnt comment on the other posts since I dont wanna go into the dvaita world too much, others can do that better.

zenzero... since for the jnani, all is brahman, I dont find there is much to discuss. So I cant follow that train completely.

The scriptures and the path(s) are for the ajnani (non-realized). Even the one reflecting on the mahavakyas (great sayings) in jnana-yoga, trying to realize this unity you speak of is on the path... and thats the one I hence indicated by saying "worship spirit/brahman".

And I would argue that "worship" is in the end non-different from the nature of brahman, since para-bhakti (supreme love) or ananya-bhakti (non-different love) is said to be non-different from jnana (knowledge). Love is common to all, but at different levels (of purity or knowledge). Hence its especially logical that the jnani loves brahman (himself), since he has become brahman (love) and sees nothing but brahman (love) everywhere.

zenzero, I seems you are into buddhist terminology, so what I said is not necessarily a contradiction, perhaps just different ways of using words.

Well thats it for now...

 

[zenzero]

Friend Ekanta,
Thank you for sharing.
Words are labels and only for an understanding.
Yes, do understand the views shared and love you for THAT.
Yes am a total agyani and am learning more from so many people like you every day that at times life is so overwelmimg that emotions burst forth which is cause of that love for life as you have beautifully explained.

Love & rgds

 

[Satyamavejayanti]

I have always been confused by the myraid listings of Gods, Avatars, etc.
Can you simplify for my western mind, how it works....

Well you would get a lot of answers, my view is quote different to many here.
There is one Ishwar (God) in Hinduism, Devata (incorrectly translated as gods in English) refers to entities that are useful for us.
In the Vedas which is the revealed scriptures of Hinduism there is no mention of gods. Vedas clearly specify that there is One and only One Ishwar, And there is no mantra in Vedas that can be interpreted to imply multiple Ishwars.
Ishwar is the Devata of Devatas and hence called ‘Mahadeva’.

eg
Yajurveda 40.1:
This entire world is embedded within and managed by the One and Only One Ishwar. Never dare do any injustice or desire riches through unjust means. Instead follow the righteous path and enjoy its bliss. After all it alone is source of all bliss!

Avatars, i think means "As if it is", so "Rama" is as if it is "Visnu" in the flesh was here, Vishnu means the preserver ect aspect of Ishvara, Rama being a realized atman (soul).

Thats my 2 cents.