• 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 kind of images can be worshipped?

Islington

Islington

Member
Greetings everyone,


I was discussing with my signifiant other, the other day, about images of devas. Her saying was that the God couldn’t enter just any image or representation.
Yet, in worshiping of Lord Ganesha in particular, I have seen a lot of representations, ranging from the traditional statues (Murti, I think?) and Kalasha to robotic interfaces and murti made of household things.

This sparked a question in me and I’d like to submit it here.

Does it take something special (say activating yantra or having a formal ceremony) to activate an image of a god ? Can you do it with any kind of image ?

Please note that in « image » I include any kind of lasting visual representation : pictural art, stone or sand statues, engraving, leaves, …
 
Nyingjé Tso

Nyingjé Tso

Dharma not drama
Vanakkam,

Anything can be worshipped, anything can be receptacle of bhakti.

Prana prathista is generally not advised for home altars, as you breathe life into the murti it must be treated at all times as a guest of master of the house and rituals have to be done regularly. This is the temple's job, so to say.

During a puja at home, if you look at the mantras and their order, you can see that you are actually summoning the deva/devi in the murti, or chosen receptacle. Then, in the end, you kindly send it away. It like dialing a number on your phone, talking, then hanging up after saying good-bye.
There are some requirements for a phone to work correctly tho: a phone made of sand won't work even if plugged. It is the Same with pictures and murtis, some materials are more able to "channel" the energy than others during formal rituals.

There are a lot of ways to worship and it all depends on the wish of the individual.

But again it is my understanding. Everything varies between hindus and sampraday.

Aum Namah Shivaya
 
Vinayaka

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I endorse the views of Aup and Jaya, but I'd just add one thing. In my opinion, some materials are better than others. Stone and metal will hold vibration better than resin, or pictures. It;s like certain materials will conduct electricity better than others.

But in the long run, its only how you feel about it. In Hinduism, the relationship with God, in bhakti, is very personal.
 
Islington

Islington

Member
Thank you, all.

if I may ask another, then. How come then some (Hindu people) ask for the image to meet certain criteria? And more importantly, how to answer?

I saw once a young artist who was quite proud of his art of Ganesha -and he could be, the art was done in a realistic fashion, picturing a powerful .
He posted it on the Internet, stating that it would be his personal homage to the divinity. The first to react was a hindu (I imagine), saying that his image wasn't fit. That Lord Ganesha imbodies sweetness and warmness instead of the power and grandeur that emanated from the artwork. He then asked that young artist to either change this image or to erase it.

What should be done then? Is Lord Ganesha to keep His round belly and loveable eye no matter what? Are some images more acceptable than others?
 
Vinayaka

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Islington said:
Thank you, all.

if I may ask another, then. How come then some (Hindu people) ask for the image to meet certain criteria? And more importantly, how to answer?
Click to expand...

We're people. All of us have individual 'lines in the sand you don't cross'. This line varies from incredibly liberal, anything goes, to ultra-conservative.

When this happens to me personally, I generally say the same thing I just said, with the caveat that 'very little offends me personally'.

The same is true for nudity or violence in movies, language, rude behaviour, etc. So we all have different standards.

I don't think its wise to react or withdraw your belief statements just because it offends someone. The entire population of this planet may well have to take lifetime silence vows if that were the case.
 
Fireside_Hindu

Fireside_Hindu

Jai Lakshmi Maa
I go with the belief that you should worship an image you can connect to regardless of the material it's made of. That's because it doesn't matter how grand a murti you have, if you feel alienated by it or can't summon the bhakti toward it, it can't connect you with the divine. Remember that images are tools. If you want to cut through wood but others insist you use a hammer instead of a saw you're going to get very frustrated very quickly.

Also, it's important to note that preferences can change very quickly. As others have mentioned stone and metal are thought to hold and transmit energy more easily than other materials. I have always preferred wooden murtis though - I find stone and metal to be literally and spiritually cold and hard to connect with. Wood feels warm and alive (for indeed it was at one point)

However, while visiting Bengaluru last year I went to a famous Ganapati temple, with a HUGE stone Ganesh murti. Very stout and fat and lovely.

I visited that temple twice more during my stay and remained in meditation despite the crowds for some time because I enjoyed that particular Ganeshji's company so much. So what made the difference? Was it the shape, color or size? Was it the energy in the temple? Who knows. Maybe all or none of those things.

I have a Ganesh murti made of painted jade, and he is one of only a few non-wood murtis in my home. Maybe different materials suit different deities?

As for censorship - Again, everyone has preferences. No one can tell you how to feel. As an artist I have painted the deities many times. While they usually are warmly received I have offended a few people (Once on this very forum) for the way I depicted the divine. Bottom line:If people don't like your interpretation, they don't have to look at it.
 
Spirit_Warrior

Spirit_Warrior

Active Member
I struggle with this "Prana Pratistha" idea. How do you know the idol in the temple has been now charged and the deva is now residing it? How do you know certain materials are more charged than others?

I can understand the idol as being just symbolic, a tool to help the bhakta channel their devotion to a focal point, but to say it now really contains the deity and is charged with energy seems more to be just faith. It like the transubstantiation that Catholics believe that after prayer the bread and wine really have become the blood and flesh of Jesus.
 
Vinayaka

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Spirit_Warrior said:
I struggle with this "Prana Pratistha" idea. How do you know the idol in the temple has been now charged and the deva is now residing it? How do you know certain materials are more charged than others?
Click to expand...

Have you ever been to a mahakumbabhishekham?

I think the prana pratishta (and its relative success) ceremony also depends partly on the priesthood doing it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top