• 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!

What is Brahman?

Gambit

Well-Known Member
It is stupid, Sat Chit Ananda is a state of being.... It isn't a description of what Brahman is, just how it feels.

Or, this is what you experience when you realize your true self because that's what your true self is.

Plus taking that in Hinduism this reality is known as Maya (delusion), which also happens to be a 3D graphics program; it makes a lot of sense that we might be inside a giant computer system. :cool:

Please tell me that you're not serious.
 

wizanda

One Accepts All Religious Texts
Premium Member
That is called an n-1 regression.
Please explain a n-1 regression or post a link to something that does, as unaware of its meaning. :)
What would the 'giant computer system' be inside ?
  • The giant computer system could be inside a reality that would have no form, if it wasn't organized. That Brahman seeing the end of time, could have extrapolated that data and built the reality based on one of our computers.
  • We could be in a laboratory and we are on a hard drive somewhere.
  • We could have wiped our self out in the future, thus we created an artificial reality to live with in.
  • * We could create a super computer in the future, that becomes self aware and then takes over the reality one day. *
  • Anything is possible; will tell you when i get out of the computer.... Yet if i came back, it would be like Plato's cave, where no one would believe me anyways. ;)
Or, this is what you experience when you realize your true self because that's what your true self is.
Nope, if you're meaning like within Advaita Vedanta philosophy, seeing yourself as Brahman; can't except that in the slightest
This is why clearly defining Brahman as the CPU, differentiates it from being anything else within the computer, like the memory or within the hard drives. Atmans are just programs running inside the system; just because Brahman processes your code, and you can access stuff, if you know how to connect with the core, doesn't ever make us the CPU. :innocent:
Please tell me that you're not serious.
Why not, as within the * point above *, who is to say that we didn't create the computer system, and therefore Maya 3D actually becomes part of the building blocks of creation. :)
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
th
 

apophenia

Well-Known Member
Please explain a n-1 regression or post a link to something that does, as unaware of its meaning. :)
will do. remind me if i seem to have forgotten


  • The giant computer system could be inside a reality that would have no form, if it wasn't organized. That Brahman seeing the end of time, could have extrapolated that data and built the reality based on one of our computers.
  • We could be in a laboratory and we are on a hard drive somewhere.
  • We could have wiped our self out in the future, thus we created an artificial reality to live with in.
  • * We could create a super computer in the future, that becomes self aware and then takes over the reality one day. *
  • Anything is possible; will tell you when i get out of the computer.... Yet if i came back, it would be like Plato's cave, where no one would believe me anyways. ;)

:D


Go to amazon and find 'Programming and Metaprogramming in he Human Biocomputer : ' by Dr John Lilly.

Programming and Metaprogramming in the Human Biocomputer: Theory and Experiments: John C. Lilly: 9780517527573: Amazon.com: Books

LSD experiments funded by the CIA in the 1960s.

Also a very general guidebook about belief systems ...

I think you will love it, if you haven't already read it. It helped blow my mind in 1973 :alien:
 

Gambit

Well-Known Member
Why not, as within the * point above *, who is to say that we didn't create the computer system, and therefore Maya 3D actually becomes part of the building blocks of creation. :)

This is complete and utter nonsense.
 

Moishe3rd

Yehudi
IMHO:

I believe that Hinduism descended from Abraham, Avraham Avinu, the Patriarch of the Jews (and incidentally of the Muslims and the Christians). This is neither "my" theory, nor is it a new theory, nor is it supported by mainstream Orthodox Jews. But I like it.

It goes like this:

Genesis 25:1-6:
"Abraham proceeded and took a woman whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. Jokshan begot Sheba and Dedan, and the children of Dedan were Ashurim, Letushim, and Leummim. And the children of Midian: Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Elda'ah; all these were the descendants of Keturah. Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac. But to the concubine-children who were Abraham's, Abraham gave gifts; then he sent them away from Isaac his son, while he was still alive, eastward to the land of the east."

Here is the Torah analysis of the above passage:

Our rabbis ask (Miizrachi):

"What gifts did Abrahham have left to give? He had previously given everything he owned to Isaac?"

(Rashi) explains: "according to the Sages (Sanhedrin 91a that gifts are not to be understood in the material sense, but rather) He imparted to them the secrets of the impure or unclean arts."

This refers to the knowledge of demons and sorcery, etc. He imparted this knowledge to teach them to counteract sorcery, and exorcise demons which enter into men (Gur Aryeh)

According to the (HaKsav V'haKabllah), Abraham imparted this knowledge to them so that they would know how to guard themselves from substituting impure names for hallowed names and inadvertently worshipping them.

(Rashi) also adds: another interpretation: Gifts refers to gifts which had been given to him because of Sarah (20:14,16 - Abraham's soujourn in Egypt where Sarah kidnapped by Pharoah), and the gifts he received from others. All of these he now gave to them since he wished to derive no benefit there-from. (Previously he had give Isaac all the wealth he had earned)

He sent them "eastward to the east country." The "land of the east" would have been Charan in Amram Naharaim and Ur Kasdim. These were the lands where Abraham's kin lived and came from. The geographical area that this would have encompassed in modern day terms is Syria, Iraq and even tribal lands in Iran.

He sent his concubine children there, confident that his kinsmen would welcome them and offer them greater friendship than they would have found elsewhere. (Radak)

(Chiizkuni) explains that Abraham sent them there to claim the ancestral inheritance that was due to him for his own family.

Now, according to the Torah, Abraham was renowned throughout the world as the Founder of Monotheism, the belief in the One, True G-d. He had great, great wealth much of it in the form of cattle. Much of the cattle he got on account of Sarahin Egypt, and as gifts from neighboring kings.

Therefore, his concubine children would have gone out as Princes of Abraham; with the knowledge of the G-d of Abraham; with much wealth in cattle; with powers given to them by Abraham to defend themselves against the idol worshippers; to claim their ancestral lands towards the East.

If they were able to claim their lands in the East, they would have become leaders of the Peoples in the lands to the East; the early Persians and Medes


Abraham lived from 1813 BCE to 1638 BCE.


Somewhere between 1700 BCE and 1200 BCE, the Aryan People descended from the Khyber pass and invaded India. They had traveled from the West, first taking over what is now Afghanistan and then moving on to India.

They were a racial mixture of Persians and Medes. They had great herds of cattle. They conquered the Indian civilizations with relative ease. They brought their gods with them into India.

This became the "Dark Ages" of India, but, as with the "Dark Ages" of Europe, it was also a time where new cultures and religions were fashioned. It is called the Vedic Age by the Hindus. Somewhere between 1200 BCE and 600 BCE, the religion of Hinduism came into being.

It was a melding of the new gods of the Aryans and the old animist worship of the Dravidian Indians.


This is what I believe happened:

The children of Abraham became the tribal leaders of the Peoples of the East. They believed in the G-d of Abraham and they knew the Names of all of the Demons and Lesser Powers that could be used to help or afflict man.

They became the Aryan race that migrated East.

As the centuries went by, the G-d of Abraham became the G-d, Abraham.

This, in turn, eventually became G-d Brahman.

In Hinduism, Brahman is the the "First Cause;" the unmanifested reality of everything.

When it manifests, it is the Creative Force, the deity, Brahma.

The wife of Brahma is Saraswati. In Hinduism, this is the feminine Creator.

Saraswati is a river in India with a minor tributary called Hakara.

Sarah was Abraham's wife. Her slave; his concubine, was Hagar.

The Hindu pantheon - Shiva, Vishnu, Kali, Yama, Krishna, Ganesha, Lakshmi, Agni, just to name of few of the hundreds, if not thousands of Hindu deities, are all considered "Lesser gods." Some are demons. All are aspects of other deities. All are subservient to, or part of, Brahman.

These could have been the names of the Lesser Powers and Demons that Abraham gave his children power over....

In Judaism, there are many Aspects of G-d. And, they all mean specific, different things, but they are all G-d.

We say the G-d of Avraham; the G-d of Yitzach; the G-d of Yaakov; G-d the Father; the G-d of Mercy; the Redeemer; the Creator; the All Supreme G-d; the G-d of Forgiviness; etcetera.

It is all one G-d. There are many Names.


Lastly, in Parshas Lech Lecha, (Genesis 12: 1-3) the Torah proclaims:

Hashem said to Abram, "Get yourself from your country, from your relatives, and from your father's house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you, and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you."

My theory would take care of that other one third of humanity that is not Christian or Muslim...

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. ;)
 

apophenia

Well-Known Member
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. ;)

Wow. That's the coolest post I've read in a long while.

Please start a thread about it, and let me know when you do.

Thanks

PS in a general forum, please, not a DIR, should you choose to do it
 

Moishe3rd

Yehudi
Wow. That's the coolest post I've read in a long while.

Please start a thread about it, and let me know when you do.

Thanks

PS in a general forum, please, not a DIR, should you choose to do it
Why a new thread?
This seemed an appropriate answer to the question.

Seriously - I would start a new thread based on this if I thought it was useful but... I don't know. If people don't want to read whatever it is, ya can't stop 'em. :)
 

apophenia

Well-Known Member
As the centuries went by, the G-d of Abraham became the G-d, Abraham.

This, in turn, eventually became G-d Brahman.

In Hinduism, Brahman is the the "First Cause;" the unmanifested reality of everything.

When it manifests, it is the Creative Force, the deity, Brahma.

The wife of Brahma is Saraswati. In Hinduism, this is the feminine Creator.

Saraswati is a river in India with a minor tributary called Hakara.

Sarah was Abraham's wife. Her slave; his concubine, was Hagar.

This seemed an appropriate answer to the question.

Indeed, and a very educational answer at that.

Zoroastrianism seems to be deeply embedded too. To my scant knowledge and scholarship, I get the feeling that this was the pre-aryan teaching, or at least a prime example of it, of the area you spoke of...

He sent them "eastward to the east country." The "land of the east" would have been Charan in Amram Naharaim and Ur Kasdim. These were the lands where Abraham's kin lived and came from. The geographical area that this would have encompassed in modern day terms is Syria, Iraq and even tribal lands in Iran.

Am I even close, in your opinion ?
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Individuals, depending on background, have varying definitions, or views of the uniquely Hindu concept of Brahman. Even within Hinduism, these views vary. For me it is God, both Saguna Brahman, and Nirguna Brahman.

I still don't see what there is to debate, unless people want to opine that their particular view or definition they use is more correct that everyone else's.I'm fine with anyone having an opinion. For someone attempting to figure it out, in their search, I suppose this thread might be useful.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Of course many of these opinions are highly ethnocentric. But that's also quite natural, as each individual can only speak from their own experience which developed that POV in the first place.
 

Moishe3rd

Yehudi
Indeed, and a very educational answer at that.

Zoroastrianism seems to be deeply embedded too. To my scant knowledge and scholarship, I get the feeling that this was the pre-aryan teaching, or at least a prime example of it, of the area you spoke of...



Am I even close, in your opinion ?
I don't know. I would guess that this would also apply to Zoroastrians but, that timeline is a little tighter than the one I quote. Zoroaster theoretically lived shortly after Abraham and therefore the whole game of "telephone" in the exchange of names would have been a little less likely to be embedded so early.
Plus, from what I understand of Zoroastrianism, there are actually 2 gods, no? I could be wrong.

My explanation of Hinduism is evolved from my understanding of the last posuk I quote which is "And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you, and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you."

Even if Zoroaster were connected to Avraham Avinu, I don't think they bless themselves by anything resembling "Abraham" unlike Jews, Christians, Muslims and, based on my story, Hindus.
Again, I could be wrong. I haven't studied Zoroastrianism much.
 

apophenia

Well-Known Member
Of course many of these opinions are highly ethnocentric. But that's also quite natural, as each individual can only speak from their own experience which developed that POV in the first place.

Yep. The history of the evolving dharma in a nutshell.

Except perhaps for "each individual can only speak from their own experience ".

Many individuals also speak from the presumed experience of others, or from the conditioning of their mind which they may or may not have consciously recognised..
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Sorry, yes, I meant 'experience' to include their reading of other's experiences. But in reality very few people can speak from their own direct cognition, or direct experience on these things. Certainly I've never experienced Brahman, and I would seriously doubt anyone here has, although some will certainly claim it.
 

apophenia

Well-Known Member
Sorry, yes, I meant 'experience' to include their reading of other's experiences. But in reality very few people can speak from their own direct cognition, or direct experience on these things. Certainly I've never experienced Brahman, and I would seriously doubt anyone here has, although some will certainly claim it.

Yes, we are certainly given reasonable cause for such doubt, very often. More often than not.

It is also true that if one acknowledges/asserts having never had such experience, then one is also necessarily acknowledging/asserting that in their current state they may be in no position to determine who has experienced /is experiencing authentic transcendent self-realisation, which we refer to in language in various ways, be it brahman, turiya, grace, or sahaja.

I find this view helpful and humbling.
 
Top