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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Brahman is not an intellectual concept. Trying to discover or understand it via the intellect is like trying to dry the ocean with another ocean.
Can you understand it without the intellect?
According to mystic sages, yes, but they don't call it an understanding, they call it a realisation. But personally, I certainly wouldn't know.
Is realisation common across hindus or is it more of an exclusive thing to the mystic sages?
I do not think 'what exists' has a 'will' or 'desire'. It is more like 'result inherent in the cause'. Like rain falling from the clouds when they reach cooler temperatures, precipitation ... ( does it even have a will of sorts? ) ..
Nice to meet you.Too late, for a madman I already am.
Non-dualism (advaita) is very strong in Hinduism.I comprehend your analogy, but to relate to hinduism we would have to make use of dualism, which is not applicable here.
We cannot experience everything but we can still get some idea. I know if I go in a hot air balloon, things on earth would look small but not as small as in an airplane unless I go up 35,000 feet above the surface. There would be less oxygen content in the air, I would have to take more breaths, the temperature would be low and if I am not wearing proper clothes I would find it freezing. At some height, I will experience air jets (polar jets, at around 7–12 km (23,000–39,000 ft) above sea level, and the higher and somewhat weaker subtropical jets at around 10–16 km (33,000–52,000 ft). Surface winds are stronger (Tropical storm: 39–73 mph, Tropical depression: <38 mph). Similarly, with the help of Google Earth, I can survey Times Square. There is a Duffy square also as well as New Diamond Cafe LLC. I hope they provide good coffee. May not be the real thing, but some idea. When we are talking about what constitutes things in the universe, we have to make a similar journey.Perhaps what you mean is more akin to 'fully' experience oneself.
Don't know about souls (or God), being an atheist, but yes, we are always that, never separated from any seemingly 'other thing', 'Tat twam asi' (in olde English 'Thou art that').Do souls retain some sort of individuality even after being united with Brahma? ( Or perhaps, the right question would be 'when they realize they and Brahma are one?' )
In the beginning, God Loved to create this universe.I have been meaning to ask this for quite a while.
What is the purpose of creating the universe(s) on hinduism?
( I know there may not be an unified view on this. Everyone is welcome to answer this question. )
Also, as far as I know, belief in a cyclic universe is quite common across hinduism.
Isn't the cyclic universe a form of samsara?
Do souls retain some sort of individuality even after being united with Brahma? ( Or perhaps, the right question would be 'when they realize they and Brahma are one?' )
I comprehend your analogy, but to relate to hinduism we would have to make use of dualism, which is not applicable here.
If I understood it right, the proper analogy would be: Say I read a book about what a human being is like. Let's say I read about it in intense detail. Let's say I become so knowledgeable on the subject that I can even speak to others and educate them about it. I know all about human beings.
But knowledge is different from experience.
And since I and 'human being' are one and the same, then I have experienced 'human being'.
Perhaps what you mean is more akin to 'fully' experience oneself. For example, if I never move even a muscle of my body, I can still say ( skipping the issue that it is not possible to say something without moving a muscle ) that I have experienced myself. But I can not say that I have fully experienced myself, since I have not made use of all my capabilities.
Would that be a correct way to look at it?
Is realisation common across hindus or is it more of an exclusive thing to the mystic sages?
10. Discuss Individual Religions Forums/Same Faith Debates/"Only Sections"
The DIR subforums are for the express use for discussion by that specific group. They are not to be used for debate by anyone. People of other groups or faiths may post respectful questions to increase their understanding. Questions of a rhetorical or argumentative nature or that counter the beliefs of that DIR are not permitted. DIR areas are not to be used as cover to bash others outside the faith. The DIR forums are strictly moderated and posts are subject to editing or removal.
-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored blue, non-members of that area are limited only to respectful questions, and are not allowed to make any non-question posts.
-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored green, non-members of that area may make respectful posts that comply with the tenets and spirit of that area. This includes questions, as well as knowledgeable comments.
The Same Faith Debates subforum is specifically for debate between members of the same faith. Members that are not part of a same faith debate thread's selected faith may not post at all in those threads. The Political "Only" subforums are also used specifically for that group and may not be posted in by members that do not correspond to the political position of the subforum. These two forums are colored purple.
IMHO, when one has exhausted his/her questions and the mind is at peace. I think it is not that difficult and happens to many people.How do we know when we're "done"? Are we ever done?
Generally speaking, 'creation' is an inaccurate term. It's there because western indologists, in the attempt to study us, had no better word.
A more accurate word is emanation, and an analogy is rain from clouds. Clouds do not create raindrops, raindrops just fall naturally from clouds.
So form (the universe) comes out of formlessness (Brahman). There is no prurpose other than God extending himself, as part of his play, or dance.
It's his very nature, and one of the lovely mysteries of the universe.
^ This, plain and simple.
Yes, Adi Shankaracharya wrote (Brahma Sutra Bhasya 2.1.33) that creation is the recreation, or play of Brahman.