Who is our True God? (Hinduism)

[Pleroma]

You have obviously self-appointed yourself to be the official custodian and spokesperson of all Hindus in the world. But somebody has to tell all Hindus in the world, because as a Hindu myself, I've never heard of you lol

This is my thread and this is my view and I have every right to defend it.

 

[Surya Deva]

This is my thread and this is my view and I have every right to defend it.

Then speak for yourself and not all Hindus

 

[Surya Deva]

Pagans don't like proselytising people, they find it intrusive and offensive. The evidence speaks for itself. Your likes and dislikes, personally biased opinions, crack-pottery, your personal incredulity has no bearing in reality.

You can go on and keep believing in any damn thing you want even after available evidence contradicting it. I'm not a man of faith, I'm a man who speak with evidence. Its you who is intellectually dishonest.

You are again speaking for others. What do you think gives you the right to speak for others? Just speak for yourself. You do not represent all Hindus. In your opinion/view Hiryangarbha is the one true god.

By the way your personal attacks are against the rules. I have been warned for far less worse. I will report any further personal attacks from you.

 

[Pleroma]

Yes, Hiranyagarbha - The Sun-God is the one true God. All gods reside in him, this is the samasthi swaroopa of the Vedic worship.

You want evidence?

Then see -

According to Max Muller, the proto Indo-Iranian religion started of as sun worship.


It is a fact that our seers worshipped the Sun God, it is a fact that Hinduism is basically a Sun-God worshipping religion and we will continue to do so to achieve self righteousness.

According to tradition, Yājñavalkya was the son of Devarāta and was the pupil of sage Vaisampayana .[3] Once, Vaisampayana got angry with Yājñavalkya as the latter argued too much to separate some latter additions to Yajurveda in being abler than other students. The angry teacher asked his pupil Yājñavalkya to give back all the knowledge of Yajurveda that he had taught him.[3]

As per the demands of his Guru, Yājñavalkya vomited all the knowledge that he acquired from his teacher in form of digested food. Other disciples of Vaisampayana took the form of partridge birds and consumed the digested knowledge (a metaphor for knowledge in its simplified form without the complexities of the whole but the simplicity of parts) because it was knowledge and they were very eager to receive the same.[3]
The Saṃskṛt name for partridge is "Tittiri". As the Tittiri (partridge) birds ate this Veda, it is thenceforth called the Taittirīya Yajurveda. It is also known as Kṛṣṇa Yajurveda or Black-Yajurveda on account of it being a vomited substance. The Taittirīya Saṃhitā thus belongs to this Yajurveda.[4]

Then Yājñavalkya determined not to have any human guru thereafter. Thus he began to propitiate the Sun God, Surya. Yājñavalkya worshipped and extolled the Sun, the master of the Vedas, for the purpose of acquiring the fresh Vedic portions not known to his preceptor, Vaiśampāyana.[5]

The Sun God, pleased with Yājñavalkya penance, assumed the form of a horse and graced the sage with such fresh portions of the Yajurveda as were not known to any other. This portion of the Yajurveda goes by the name of Śukla Yajurveda or White-Yajurveda on account of it being revealed by Sun. It is also known as Vajasaneya Yajurveda, because it was evolved in great rapidity by Sun who was in the form of a horse through his manes.The rhythm of recital of these vedas is therefore to the rhythm of the horse canter and distinguishes itself from the other forms of veda recitals. In Sanskrit, term "Vaji" means horse. Yājñavalkya divided this Vajasaneya Yajurveda again into fifteen branches, each branch comprising hundreds of Yajus Mantras. Sages like Kanva, Madhyandina and others learnt those and Śukla Yajurveda branched into popular recensions named after them.[3]

Who is the master of the Vedas? Who is the master of the Agnisoma Mandala? Who? Its the Sun God, the God of the gods and none beside him.

Yājñavalkya has made important contributions to both philosophy,[3] including the apophatic teaching of 'neti neti', and to astronomy, describing the 95-year cycle to synchronize the motions of the sun and the moon

Our seers were not so dumb that they could not differentiate between the manifested outer sun which is a star of the milkyway galaxy and Sun-God which resides in everyone. Yajnavalkya is one of the important rishi of Hinduism and whom did he worshipped, he worshipped the Sun and from whom he got all his knowledge from, it is from the Sun-God.

White Yajur Veda: Book I

The Rishi of White Yajurveda is Yajnavalkya and in whose name the glory of that Veda is recited, ofcourse its God Savitur, who is Savitur, he is the Sun God.

What is the basic tenet of Hinduism its the Gayatri Mantra and to whom it is addressed to, yes it is addressed to Savitur, the Sun-God. This is Hinduism, this is the main message of Hinduism to the world.
Souram

Who is the diety explicitly spoken in the Upanishads ofcourse its Hiranyagarbha - The Sun-God.
Toward a Unified Metaphysical Understanding: Hiranyagarbha

Adityahridayam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Then knowing that the destruction of the lord of prowlers at night (Ravana) was near, Aditya, who was at the center of the assembly of the Gods, looked at Rama and exclaimed 'Hurry up' with great delight. Purifying Himself by sipping water thrice, He took up His bow with His mighty arms. Seeing Ravana coming to fight, He put forth all his effort with a determination to destroy Ravana."

Who is at the center of the assembly of the Gods, of course its Aditya, the Sun-God. He is the master of the Agnisoma Mandala.

This was the evidence from Sruti.

You want scientific evidence?

Then see -

Quantum physics says goodbye to reality - physicsworld.com

Many of the quantum researchers who have won Noble prizes have already renounced realism, the reality given by science is constructed, neither quarks, protons, electrons, brain exists out there in the external physical world, its all a creation of the mind.

Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality

Alain Aspect is the physicist who performed the key experiment that established that if you want a real universe, it must be non-local (Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance”). Aspect comments on new work by his successor in conducting such experiments, Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues, who have now performed an experiment that suggests that “giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned.”
Be clear what is going on here. Quantum mechanics itself is not crying out for such experiments! Quantum mechanics is doing just fine, thank you, having performed flawlessly since inception. No, it is people whose cherished philosophical beliefs are being threatened that cry out for such experiments, exactly as Einstein used to do, and with exactly the same hope (we think in vain): that quantum mechanics can be refined to the point where it requires (or at least allows) belief in the independent reality of the natural world it describes.

Quantum mechanics makes no mention of reality (Figure 1). Indeed, quantum mechanics proclaims, “We have no need of that hypothesis.” Now we are beginning to see that quantum mechanics might actually exclude any possibility of mind-independent reality⎯and already does exclude any reality that resembles our usual concept of such (Aspect: “it implies renouncing the kind of realism I would have liked”). Non-local causality is a concept that had never played any role in physics, other than in rejection (“action-at-a-distance”), until Aspect showed in 1981 that the alternative would be the abandonment of the cherished belief in mind-independent reality; suddenly, spooky-action-at-a-distance became the lesser of two evils, in the minds of the materialists.

Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the illusion of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism.

Narada Muni continued: What I referred to as the chariot was in actuality the body. The senses are the horses that pull that chariot. As time passes, year after year, these horses run without obstruction, but in fact they make no progress. Pious and impious activities are the two wheels of the chariot. The three modes of material nature are the chariot's flags. The five types of life air constitute the living entity's bondage, and the mind is considered to be the rope. Intelligence is the chariot driver. The heart is the sitting place in the chariot, and the dualities of life, such as pleasure and pain, are the knotting place. The seven elements are the coverings of the chariot, and the working senses are the five external processes. The eleven senses are the soldiers. Being engrossed in sense enjoyment, the living entity, seated on the chariot, hankers after fulfillment of his false desires and runs after sense enjoyment life after life. (SB 4.29.18-20)

Srimad Bhagvatham dates back to around 3000 BC according to the verses from the Bhagvatham itself.

1. Its a fact that our seers knew that mind is separate and different from the brain or the body.

2. Its a fact that our seers knew that intelligence exists in platonic realms and mathematical physicists like Roger Penrose are strong Platonists.

3. Its a fact that our seers knew about the life force Prana which identifies the Self with the body.

4. Its a fact that our seers knew who the Supreme Godhead is who controls this cosmos.

Scientific realism is dead and also atheism too is dead. Its not that theists who are delusional, broken and intellectually dishonest, its atheists who are delusional, broken and intellectually dishonest.

 

[Pleroma]

Hinduism is always been a theistic religion, it will continue to do so and all evidence both from science as well as from the scriptures is pointing to theistic existence of God and anyone who denies this is very delusional indeed.

Don't ever come to the Hinduism DIR criticizing those people who show humility and who surrender themselves to God to move in the direction of the path of self righteousness. You know nothing about Hinduism and that's why people have ridiculed you. Please go and learn more about Hinduism before you start preaching us as to what Hinduism is.

Oh yes, this is universal not specified to the country of India. Got it? who is a fanatic now?

 

[Surya Deva]

It is a fact that our seers worshipped the Sun God, it is a fact that Hinduism is basically a Sun-God worshipping religion and we will continue to do so to achieve self righteousness.

I am not sure you noticed my name is 'Surya Deva' which means that I respect that the sun is a very important symbol in the Vedic tradition and I also accept its symbolic importance of referring to the inner-self, but which is a very peculiar interpretation only specific to the Vedanta school, and there is no clear proof to show the early Vedic people believed the same.

However to say the Sun-God is the one and true only god of the Vedic people is clearly false and easily disproven. The Vedic people not only worshiped the Sun-God they worshiped the rain god, thunder god, fire god, wind god, sea god, dawn god, storm god.

Here are some verses addresses to various Vedic gods from the Rig Veda:

Indra

1.51.15 To him the Mighty One, the self-resplendent, verily strong and great, this praise is uttered.
May we and all the heroes, with the princes, be, in this fray, O Indra, in thy keeping.

Agni

6.1.8-11

Sage of mankind, all peoples' Lord and Master, the Bull of men, the sender down of blessings,
Still pressing on, promoting, purifying, Agni the Holy One, the Lord of riches.
Agni, the mortal who hath toiled and worshipped, brought thee oblations with his kindled fuel,
And well knows sacrifice with adoration, gains every joy with thee to guard and help him.
Mightily let us worship thee the Mighty, with reverence, Agni! fuel and oblations,
With songs, O Son of Strength, with hymns, with altar: so may we strive for thine auspicious favour.
Thou who hast covered heaven and earth with splendour and with thy glories, glorious and triumphant.

Varuna

2.28.1-4

THIS laud of the self-radiant wise Āditya shall be supreme o’er all that is in greatness.
beg renown of Varuṇa the Mighty, the God exceeding kind to him who worships.
Having extolled thee. Varuṇa, with thoughtful care may we have high fortune in thy service,
Singing thy praises like the fires at coming, day after day, of mornings rich in cattle.
May we be in thy keeping, O thou Leader wide-ruling Varuṇa, Lord of many heroes.
O sons of Aditi, for ever faithful, pardon us, Gods, admit us to your friendship.
He made them flow, the Āditya, the Sustainer: the rivers run by Varuṇa's commandment.
These feel no weariness, nor cease from flowing: swift have they flown like birds in air around us

Pritvhi:

5.84.1-3

THOU, of a truth,O Prthivi, bearest the tool that rends the hills:
Thou rich in torrents, who with might quickenest earth, O Mighty One.
To thee, O wanderer at will, ring out the lauds with beams of day,
Who drivest, like a neighing steed, the swelling cloud, O bright of hue.
Who graspest with thy might on earth. e’en the strong sovrans of the wood,
When from the lightning of thy cloud the rain-floods of the heaven descend.

Rudra

1 WHAT shall we sing to Rudra, strong, most bounteous, excellently wise,
That shall be dearest to his heart?
2 That Aditi may grant the grace of Rudra to our folk, our kine,
Our cattle and our progeny;
3 That Mitra and that Varuṇa, that Rudra may remember us,
Yea, all the Gods with one accord.
4 To Rudra Lord of sacrifice, of hymns and balmy medicines,
We pray for joy and health and strength.
5 He shines in splendour like the Sun, refulgent as bright gold is he,
The good, the best among the Gods.

The above shows the Vedic people did not just worship the Sun god, they worshiped many natural gods, and they used very similar appellations "mighty one" "supreme" "god of all gods" They also seemed to be very liberal, worshiping many different gods at once

You want scientific evidence?

Then see -

Quantum physics says goodbye to reality - physicsworld.com

Many of the quantum researchers who have won Noble prizes have already renounced realism, the reality given by science is constructed, neither quarks, protons, electrons, brain exists out there in the external physical world, its all a creation of the mind.

Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality

Neither of your links from these physicists say the Sun-God is the one and true god lol

Srimad Bhagvatham dates back to around 3000 BC according to the verses from the Bhagvatham itself.

The Srimad Bhagvatham based on independent secular scholarship is dated between 600AD and 900AD. Moreover, the Srimad Bhagvatham is not addressed to the Sun-God, but Vishnu and Vishnu's incarnations, primarily Krishna. Krishna is the supreme god of the SB not the sun god.

 

[Surya Deva]

1. Its a fact that our seers knew that mind is separate and different from the brain or the body.

There is nothing in the Vedic Samhitas and Brahmanas to suggest any idea that the mind and the brain are separate and the early Vedic people had such a philosophy. In fact on the contrary, in the Vedic Upanishads mind and the body are proven to be both made out of food. The gross portion of the food we eat forms the gross part of the body like fat, marrow and blood, the subtle portion of the food we eat forms our mind and intellect.

"My dear boy, listen to the conclusion of my research. The mind is essentially formed of food, the prana is essentially formed of water and speech is essentially formed of fire." The boy says, "It is very difficult for me to understand all these things. Please clarify this a little more. These are unheard of things that you are telling me, that I am made up of the three elements, that I have nothing in me of my own. This is strange indeed. It looks as if I cannot exist at all independently. I am 'somebody else'. Unbelievable! Please explain further." "Yes, I shall tell you, in detail, dear boy. Listen attentively."

"You know, curd (yogurt), when churned, exudes butter. Butter rises up on churning the curd. It comes up as the essential part of the milk through the process of curdling and churning. This is what happens to the food that we take. It is churned inside by the forces of our body, and the essential part of the food rises up into the structure of the psychological organ. It becomes the essence of our thinking process. It becomes the mind. As butter comes out of milk through curdling and churning, even so, the mind starts functioning by means of the churning of the food through the action of the forces of the body. This is the case with everything else also - the water that we drink, and the other fiery elements that we consume.

In the same way as the mind is formed of the essential subtle parts of gross food, so is prana formed of water and speech formed of the fiery elements in the food. "So, my dear boy, have I concluded my findings."

Now do you understand that the mind is formed of food, prana is made of water, and speech is made of fire?" "Still more do I require clarification. This much is not enough. Tell me something more about this secret." "Yes; I shall now declare the secret behind all this, how food influences the mind, and how the mind is entirely dependent upon food."

There are sixteen digits of the mind, of our whole personality. Our being is sixteenfold. I shall perform an experiment with you to prove how the mind cannot exist without food. Do not eat for fifteen days. Do not take any solid diet during these days. You may drink water, however. Why? Because, of the fact that the pranas are constituted of water. Thus, if you drink water, the pranas will not be cut off from the body. If you do not drink even water, you will not be there to undergo the experiment; the pranas would leave the body. So I tell you, drink water as much as you want, but do not eat food for fifteen days. You know very well, I told you just now, that the prana is formed of the water element. Hence, a person who drinks water cannot die so easily."

The boy did not eat for fifteen days, as advised. He fasted completely, but drank water to his heart's content. Then he came to the father, after having fasted for fifteen days. "Now what shall I tell you, father? I have come to you after fifteen days of fasting. I have not eaten anything." "Oh! Chant the Veda," the father said. "Chant the Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samavada." "I cannot remember anything," said the boy. "I cannot remember even one verse of the Rigveda, or the Yajurveda, or the Samaveda. Memory has gone. The mind is not functioning."

"Now, do you know what has happened to you, my dear boy? Do you know why you cannot remember the Vedas, though you are a learned person? You are a master of the Vedas, and you say you cannot remember one verse. What has happened to you? You have not eaten food. That is all. This is the simple reason. How is it that your memory has gone merely because you have not eaten? Take the example of fire. Suppose there is a huge conflagration of fire which is burning strongly and it has now subsided and you have removed all the firewood*. The fuel has been withdrawn and the fire is subsiding gradually. There is only one small spark left. What can that spark do? It cannot burn things. The conflagration can burn anything which is thrown into it, but the spark cannot so burn. Now, the fire is there, but it is so little quantitatively and so feeble in its action that it cannot do the work of fire though it is qualitatively fire alone. This is what happened to you. Fifteen parts of your mind have been withdrawn. You are sixteenfold, as I told you. For fifteen days you have not eaten. So, only one part of your mind is now active. Of the sixteen parts, one part is there. Perhaps if you had not eaten for sixteen days, something worse would have happened. For fifteen days you have not eaten, and so fifteen parts of the mind have been withdrawn, even as fuel is withdrawn from a fire. The mind is there only in name. You are able to think, but not effectively, and not to any purpose, just as the fire is there as a spark but it cannot do the work of fire. This is what happened to you by not eating food. Therefore, you cannot chant the Veda. The mind is not working; how can you remember anything? The Vedas have gone from your mind. Now, my dear boy, go and eat. Then you will understand something more about this secret." The boy then went and had a meal. He ate well, indeed, because he had not eaten for fifteen days. After eating a square meal, and having rested, he comes back to the father. The boy is happy.

He was very happy; having eaten food, the mind was alert at once, and he remembered all the Vedas, and everything came to his memory. Whatever question was put, he could answer immediately because of the strength which the mind had received through the food that he had taken. Otherwise, he was in a dying condition.

Illustrations of the Threefold Nature - The Chhandogya Upanishad - Chapter Two: Uddalaka's Teaching Concerning the Oneness of the Self

Consistent with the Upanishadic explanation that mind is merely just subtle matter, both Vedanta and Samkhya philosophy accept no mind-body/brain dualism, stating mind to be nothing more than just a subtle kind of matter. Mind-body dualism has never really been a problem in Hindu philosophy. Rather Hindu philosophy is strongly based on matter-consciousness dualism(purusha and prakriti/Shiva and Shakti) mind and all its components vis intellect, ego, memory, manas are all seen to be products of matter.

2. Its a fact that our seers knew that intelligence exists in platonic realms and mathematical physicists like Roger Penrose are strong Platonists.

Our seers knew the intelligence existed in Platonic realms? They didn't know what the word 'platonic-realms' means, excuse the pun, but it would have been Greek to them lol Platonic realm comes from Greek philosophy, not Indian philosophy. You are mixing philosophical terms from different traditions rather irresponsibly here. If you think there is a equivalent philosophical term in the Vedic tradition for the 'platonic realm' then please state what that term is and which school of the Vedic tradition does it come from? And what the heck does that have to do with your position that the sun god is the only one true god of the Hindus?

Scientific realism is dead and also atheism too is dead. Its not that theists who are delusional, broken and intellectually dishonest, its atheists who are delusional, broken and intellectually dishonest.

Ok, but err what does this have to with your position that the Sun-God is the one true god?

I also wanted to point out do you know that Hiryangarbh, Savitur and Surya are not identical gods in the Vedas?

 

[Surya Deva]

Hinduism is always been a theistic religion, it will continue to do so and all evidence both from science as well as from the scriptures is pointing to theistic existence of God and anyone who denies this is very delusional indeed.

Actually, you are pretty delusional here yourself and cannot appreciate that Hindu thought has never been monolithic but incredibly diverse. The early Vedic people did not have a monotheistic god, they worshiped several natural gods(as proven in the citation of the hymns above) The later Vedic people developed the idea of a monotheistic/monistic god, ONE truth or one spirit(ekam sat, purusha) By the time of Vedanta the Vedic people became transtheistic, advancing the doctrine of the Self as God, as the inner-being that pervades all and rejected any separate god/s.

By the time of the Darsanas the idea of god was rejected in many Hindu schools. The Mimassas rejected the existence of an eternal god, but rather believed that the mantras of the Vedas or dharma-rita was eternal and the supreme principle of reality. The Vedantins rejected the existence of a separate external god, and believed that the self was the real god of all reality. Ishvara is considered a product of maya.The Samkhyas had no position for god in there system, but rather were strong materialists and explained all of creation as being due to pradhana or material cause, serving the needs of souls and final liberation is attained through discriminative knowledge between theb two. The Yoga school accepted a personal god in their system, but only as a practical tool to help the yogi attain the final state of self-realization where all distinctions disappear. In the Yoga school there is no real difference between a liberated purusha and ishvara. The Yoga sutras has less than half a dozen sutras addressed to ishvara.

Only the Vaiseshika and the Nyaya very explicitly accept the existence of a separate god, but they seem to only out of the need to explain the creation of the world, but using substances which are already pre-existent, positing a prime-mover god like Aristotle and a sustainer god that keeps all the atoms held together from his omniscience and fairly rewards the karma of every soul. This type of god is a mere superintendent and facilitate in the universe, but does not create the universe or souls. Final liberation is not attained through worship of this god, but through knowledge of the tattvas and their particularity(visesa)

Hence out of the 6 classical schools of Hindu philosophy 2 are absolutely atheistic(Mimassa, Samkhya) 1 is transtheistic monist(Vedanta) 1 is pragmatic theism and transtheistic(Yoga) and 2 are theistic(Nyaya and Vaiseshika) Neither of these schools have any place for worship of separate god/s. 1 is ritualistic(Mimassa) and 5 are rational.

Thus your statement that Hinduism has always been theistic is not correct. The only theistic tradition in Hinduism is the Bhakti tradition which is a relatively recent development in history, which contributes its own school of Vedanta Dvaita, Visesadvaita

Don't ever come to the Hinduism DIR criticizing those people who show humility and who surrender themselves to God to move in the direction of the path of self righteousness. You know nothing about Hinduism and that's why people have ridiculed you. Please go and learn more about Hinduism before you start preaching us as to what Hinduism is.

I obviously seem to know more about Hinduism, its history and development, its different schools of philosophy, its diversity of beliefs and practices, the official scholarship on it than you do. On the other hand you seem to have a very schizophrenic and incoherent vision of Hinduism which seems to be a bizarre mix of early Vedic religion, modern Hindu nationalism, Aryanism, Platonism, Gnosticsm, quantum physics and new-age, and your own peculiar fundamentalism that the Sun-God is the one true god of Hindus(which no Hindu here in this thread has agreed with) Simply put, it is a big mess which I cannot make head or tails of.

 

[Pleroma]

I am not sure you noticed my name is 'Surya Deva' which means that I respect that the sun is a very important symbol in the Vedic tradition and I also accept its symbolic importance of referring to the inner-self, but which is a very peculiar interpretation only specific to the Vedanta school, and there is no clear proof to show the early Vedic people believed the same.

However to say the Sun-God is the one and true only god of the Vedic people is clearly false and easily disproven. The Vedic people not only worshiped the Sun-God they worshiped the rain god, thunder god, fire god, wind god, sea god, dawn god, storm god.

Here are some verses addresses to various Vedic gods from the Rig Veda:

Indra

1.51.15 To him the Mighty One, the self-resplendent, verily strong and great, this praise is uttered.
May we and all the heroes, with the princes, be, in this fray, O Indra, in thy keeping.

Agni

6.1.8-11

Sage of mankind, all peoples' Lord and Master, the Bull of men, the sender down of blessings,
Still pressing on, promoting, purifying, Agni the Holy One, the Lord of riches.
Agni, the mortal who hath toiled and worshipped, brought thee oblations with his kindled fuel,
And well knows sacrifice with adoration, gains every joy with thee to guard and help him.
Mightily let us worship thee the Mighty, with reverence, Agni! fuel and oblations,
With songs, O Son of Strength, with hymns, with altar: so may we strive for thine auspicious favour.
Thou who hast covered heaven and earth with splendour and with thy glories, glorious and triumphant.

Varuna

2.28.1-4

THIS laud of the self-radiant wise Āditya shall be supreme o’er all that is in greatness.
beg renown of Varuṇa the Mighty, the God exceeding kind to him who worships.
Having extolled thee. Varuṇa, with thoughtful care may we have high fortune in thy service,
Singing thy praises like the fires at coming, day after day, of mornings rich in cattle.
May we be in thy keeping, O thou Leader wide-ruling Varuṇa, Lord of many heroes.
O sons of Aditi, for ever faithful, pardon us, Gods, admit us to your friendship.
He made them flow, the Āditya, the Sustainer: the rivers run by Varuṇa's commandment.
These feel no weariness, nor cease from flowing: swift have they flown like birds in air around us

Pritvhi:

5.84.1-3

THOU, of a truth,O Prthivi, bearest the tool that rends the hills:
Thou rich in torrents, who with might quickenest earth, O Mighty One.
To thee, O wanderer at will, ring out the lauds with beams of day,
Who drivest, like a neighing steed, the swelling cloud, O bright of hue.
Who graspest with thy might on earth. e’en the strong sovrans of the wood,
When from the lightning of thy cloud the rain-floods of the heaven descend.

Rudra

1 WHAT shall we sing to Rudra, strong, most bounteous, excellently wise,
That shall be dearest to his heart?
2 That Aditi may grant the grace of Rudra to our folk, our kine,
Our cattle and our progeny;
3 That Mitra and that Varuṇa, that Rudra may remember us,
Yea, all the Gods with one accord.
4 To Rudra Lord of sacrifice, of hymns and balmy medicines,
We pray for joy and health and strength.
5 He shines in splendour like the Sun, refulgent as bright gold is he,
The good, the best among the Gods.

The above shows the Vedic people did not just worship the Sun god, they worshiped many natural gods, and they used very similar appellations "mighty one" "supreme" "god of all gods" They also seemed to be very liberal, worshiping many different gods at once

This is your personal incredulity, I have never denied that these Gods like Agni, Rudra, Prithvi, Soma, Indra, Yama does not exist, all these gods belong to the pantheon of the Sun and all these Gods are One and I worship them as One form as Savitur - The Sun God, which is the Samasthi form of Vedic worship which means all these gods are rays of the one holistic Savitur and all these rays reside in Savitur. You can worship these rays individually as individual gods for a specific desire like if you want to have control over Prana then worship that particular ray of Savitur and worship Prana as an individual god, this is the Vishruta form of Vedic worship were you worship gods individually and not in a holistic way.

Therefore your verses from the Rig Veda no where contradicts with what I am saying. Its left to you as to which form of Vedic worship you like to chose, I want to know the Brahman, the truth which resides in a golden vessel in the Agnisoma Mandala and therefore I chose to worship them in a holistic way as One form as Savitur - The Sun God.

"The face of Truth is concealed by a golden vessel. Do thou, O Sun, open it so as to be seen by me who am by nature truthful (or, am the performer of rightful duties)."

- Isha Upanishad, verse 15.

No matter how many times you deny that there was no Monotheistic thought in the Vedas, the evidence is very clear.
Hindu views on monotheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamaghnimāhuratho divyaḥ sa suparṇo gharutmān,
ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadantyaghniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ

"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutmān.

To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan."(trans. Griffith)

What is One is the holistic form of the Vedic worship which is Savitur- The Sun God, the master of the Agnisoma Mandala is Savitur and all these gods Agni, Yama, Indra, Mitra, Varuna reside in him.

Don't ever take the Sun-God as a metaphor, he is as real and as physical as anything else is.

Everyone here act as though they are experts on Hinduism without knowing that there are far more intellectual people and expert scholars who know more about the Vedas and the Upanishads than anyone else here and instead of researching what I am saying everyone here act like they know Brahman.

I have this from an highly respected Vedic Scholar named Devudu Narasimha Shastry. Devudu Narasimha Sastri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Irrespective of what you say we know what the truth about Hinduism is, so if you have humility go and learn more about Hinduism or if you want to take your egoistic approach believing that you know more about Hinduism than anyone else then there is no one so deluded than you are.

Neither of your links from these physicists say the Sun-God is the one and true god lol

Again this is your personal incredulity, if the Sun-God has to exist or even if Brahman has to exist then scientific realism must be false and this is the time for rejoicing and I am rejoicing because science itself is saying that Scientific realism is false. I should laugh at you. LoL

The Srimad Bhagvatham based on independent secular scholarship is dated between 600AD and 900AD. Moreover, the Srimad Bhagvatham is not addressed to the Sun-God, but Vishnu and Vishnu's incarnations, primarily Krishna. Krishna is the supreme god of the SB not the sun god.

Vishnu is Narayana and we worship Narayana as "Om Sri Surya Narayanaya" and yes everything in Hinduism is addressed to the Sun God.

 

[Pleroma]

There is nothing in the Vedic Samhitas and Brahmanas to suggest any idea that the mind and the brain are separate and the early Vedic people had such a philosophy. In fact on the contrary, in the Vedic Upanishads mind and the body are proven to be both made out of food. The gross portion of the food we eat forms the gross part of the body like fat, marrow and blood, the subtle portion of the food we eat forms our mind and intellect.


Consistent with the Upanishadic explanation that mind is merely just subtle matter, both Vedanta and Samkhya philosophy accept no mind-body/brain dualism, stating mind to be nothing more than just a subtle kind of matter. Mind-body dualism has never really been a problem in Hindu philosophy. Rather Hindu philosophy is strongly based on matter-consciousness dualism(purusha and prakriti/Shiva and Shakti) mind and all its components vis intellect, ego, memory, manas are all seen to be products of matter.

Narada Muni continued: What I referred to as the chariot was in actuality the body. The senses are the horses that pull that chariot. As time passes, year after year, these horses run without obstruction, but in fact they make no progress. Pious and impious activities are the two wheels of the chariot. The three modes of material nature are the chariot's flags. The five types of life air constitute the living entity's bondage, and the mind is considered to be the rope. Intelligence is the chariot driver. The heart is the sitting place in the chariot, and the dualities of life, such as pleasure and pain, are the knotting place. The seven elements are the coverings of the chariot, and the working senses are the five external processes. The eleven senses are the soldiers. Being engrossed in sense enjoyment, the living entity, seated on the chariot, hankers after fulfillment of his false desires and runs after sense enjoyment life after life. (SB 4.29.18-20)

If you don't know when to take things metaphorical and when to take things literal then its not my problem, that shows your ignorance in Hinduism.

@ Arindam is
The Atman is beyond Body, Mind, Intellect complex. It is Dhruk and not Dhrushya, it is the seer and not seen. The BMI are coming under 'seen' and realsing that I am the Seer is the knowledge.

It is taught in three different ways. It is beyond Pancha kosa , Avastatreya, and Sarirathreya.
Atman is different from Pancha Kosas- Body, Prana,Manas,Buddhi and beyond Ananda as a kosa.
And different from Wakeful,dream, Deep sleep state.
And different from Gross, subtle and Causal bodies.

The idea is Mind and Intellects are also different from Atma

As any common man who has studied Hinduism knows that Manas and Buddhi are two different things and anyone who knows the vidya of Avastatreya can know the Mind and they can also know the Intelligence existing in Platonic realms. The Body-Mind-Intellect complex is the main tenet of Hinduism and Avastatreya is all mentioned in the Upanishads itself.
This empirical body made of Brain, atoms, organs etc is an illusion created by the mind and this spiritual body made of nadis where Prana runs is alive because of the life force Prana and what's behind the Mind is Intelligence and the one who controls and directs our Intellect is Ishvara, The Sun-God, the Parmathma as mentioned in the Gita.

The epistemology of Science is different from the epistemology of the Vedas and the Upanishads, don't ever confuse and mix both of them, it makes you look silly and devoid of any wisdom what so ever.

Our seers knew the intelligence existed in Platonic realms? They didn't know what the word 'platonic-realms' means, excuse the pun, but it would have been Greek to them lol Platonic realm comes from Greek philosophy, not Indian philosophy. You are mixing philosophical terms from different traditions rather irresponsibly here. If you think there is a equivalent philosophical term in the Vedic tradition for the 'platonic realm' then please state what that term is and which school of the Vedic tradition does it come from? And what the heck does that have to do with your position that the sun god is the only one true god of the Hindus?

Any common man knows that our seers knew that Intelligence existed in Platonic realms, read above, lol. As I said people should laugh at you.

Ok, but err what does this have to with your position that the Sun-God is the one true god?

As said earlier if the holistic Sun-God and Brahman has to exist then scientific realism must be false and science itself is saying that scientific realism is false showing that the Sun-God exists.

Its something which you fail to understand due to your lack of competent skill.

I also wanted to point out do you know that Hiryangarbh, Savitur and Surya are not identical gods in the Vedas?

Do you know what the twelve names of the Sun-God is? Check that out please and then come back to me and ask that question. Okay?

 

[Pleroma]

Actually, you are pretty delusional here yourself and cannot appreciate that Hindu thought has never been monolithic but incredibly diverse. The early Vedic people did not have a monotheistic god, they worshiped several natural gods(as proven in the citation of the hymns above) The later Vedic people developed the idea of a monotheistic/monistic god, ONE truth or one spirit(ekam sat, purusha) By the time of Vedanta the Vedic people became transtheistic, advancing the doctrine of the Self as God, as the inner-being that pervades all and rejected any separate god/s.

As cited many times before with many numerous evidences, monotheistic thought did existed from the beginning of the Rig Veda itself, no one is saying that they had a monotheistic god, that's your misunderstanding of my views, it is a fact that they had a holistic view of worshipping their polytheistic Gods as One i.e Savithru- The Sun God.

Again as cited many times before the Upanishads does mention all of the Gods which is mentioned in the Vedas and these gods were actively discussed in various discussions between Yajnavalkya, Gargi and Maitreyi and many of the Upanishads does mention about Hiranyagarbha and it is a fundamental tenet of Hinduism as Wikipedia itself obliges.

Hiranyagarbha - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Hiraṇyagarbha (Devanagari: हिरण्यगर्भः ; literally the 'golden womb' or 'golden egg', poetically rendered 'universal germ') is the source of the creation of the Universe or the manifested cosmos in Indian philosophy,"

It is surprising that someone who calls himself an expert on Hinduism is not aware of this which shows that you know nothing of Hinduism.

I am not concerned of atheists, at least they don't even enter into conversations like this and misrepresent religions. I am more concerned of people like you who are delusional having half-knowledge with no wisdom try to misrepresent Hinduism just because you can convert people into Hinduism.

Hinduism never tries to convert people into its religion like you're doing. Allow everyone to be free.

By the time of the Darsanas the idea of god was rejected in many Hindu schools. The Mimassas rejected the existence of an eternal god, but rather believed that the mantras of the Vedas or dharma-rita was eternal and the supreme principle of reality. The Vedantins rejected the existence of a separate external god, and believed that the self was the real god of all reality. Ishvara is considered a product of maya.The Samkhyas had no position for god in there system, but rather were strong materialists and explained all of creation as being due to pradhana or material cause, serving the needs of souls and final liberation is attained through discriminative knowledge between theb two. The Yoga school accepted a personal god in their system, but only as a practical tool to help the yogi attain the final state of self-realization where all distinctions disappear. In the Yoga school there is no real difference between a liberated purusha and ishvara. The Yoga sutras has less than half a dozen sutras addressed to ishvara.

Yoga Yajnavalkya specifically states that the main purpose of Yoga is,

संयोगो योग इत्युक्तो जीवात्मपरमात्मनोः॥
saṁyogo yoga ityukto jīvātma-paramātmanoḥ॥
Union of the self (jivātma) with the Divine (paramātma) is said to be yoga.
—Yoga Yajnavalkya I.43

Paramatma is none other than Ishvara, The Sun-God.

Again your view is false and wrong indeed.

Only the Vaiseshika and the Nyaya very explicitly accept the existence of a separate god, but they seem to only out of the need to explain the creation of the world, but using substances which are already pre-existent, positing a prime-mover god like Aristotle and a sustainer god that keeps all the atoms held together from his omniscience and fairly rewards the karma of every soul. This type of god is a mere superintendent and facilitate in the universe, but does not create the universe or souls. Final liberation is not attained through worship of this god, but through knowledge of the tattvas and their particularity(visesa)

Hence out of the 6 classical schools of Hindu philosophy 2 are absolutely atheistic(Mimassa, Samkhya) 1 is transtheistic monist(Vedanta) 1 is pragmatic theism and transtheistic(Yoga) and 2 are theistic(Nyaya and Vaiseshika) Neither of these schools have any place for worship of separate god/s. 1 is ritualistic(Mimassa) and 5 are rational.

Thus your statement that Hinduism has always been theistic is not correct. The only theistic tradition in Hinduism is the Bhakti tradition which is a relatively recent development in history, which contributes its own school of Vedanta Dvaita, Visesadvaita

What? Don't make yourself sound silly. If you're an atheist go and find yourself an atheistic religion, don't come to Hinduism and argue that Hinduism is an atheistic religion which is basically a theistic religion and a Sun-God worshipping religion.

Hindu philosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hindu philosophy is traditionally divided into six āstika (Sanskrit: आस्तिक "orthodox") schools of thought,[1] or darśanas (दर्शनस्, "views"), which accept the Vedas as supreme revealed scriptures. Three other nāstika (नास्तिक "heterodox") schools do not accept the Vedas as authoritative.

The āstika schools are:

Samkhya, a strongly dualist theoretical exposition of mind and matter, that denies the existence of God.

Yoga, a school emphasizing meditation closely based on Samkhya

Nyaya or logics

Vaisheshika, an empiricist school of atomism

Mimamsa, an anti-ascetic and anti-mysticist school of orthopraxy

Vedanta, the last segment of knowledge in the Vedas, or the 'Jnan' (knowledge) 'Kanda' (section). Vedanta came to be the dominant current of Hinduism in the post-medieval period.

The nāstika schools are:

Buddhism
Jainism
Cārvāka

I strongly advice you that you please convert yourself to one of these nastika schools and don't call yourself an Hindu which is an insult to all those who are Hindus, please don't do that.

I obviously seem to know more about Hinduism, its history and development, its different schools of philosophy, its diversity of beliefs and practices, the official scholarship on it than you do. On the other hand you seem to have a very schizophrenic and incoherent vision of Hinduism which seems to be a bizarre mix of early Vedic religion, modern Hindu nationalism, Aryanism, Platonism, Gnosticsm, quantum physics and new-age, and your own peculiar fundamentalism that the Sun-God is the one true god of Hindus(which no Hindu here in this thread has agreed with) Simply put, it is a big mess which I cannot make head or tails of.

I am a Jnana yogi, for me knowledge is very important and I am rational and I go by evidence and other Hindus have not agreed with me because that's what happens when you give too much emphasis for the stories in the myths and Purunas rather than the knowledge in the scriptures. I don't really go after learning stories, I go after knowledge having practical practice performing Yoga and that's what happens when you give too much emphasis on Bhakti because it blinds the intellect and the wisdom.

If you happen to remember I appreciated your posts which you made against the Bhakti movement in the begining but I diverged from your view when you called Advaitha is atheistic and compared god with flying spaghetti monster which was very unwise of you.

 

[Surya Deva]

As cited many times before with many numerous evidences, monotheistic thought did existed from the beginning of the Rig Veda itself, no one is saying that they had a monotheistic god, that's your misunderstanding of my views, it is a fact that they had a holistic view of worshipping their polytheistic Gods as One i.e Savithru- The Sun God.

The evidence you have cited that the Vedic people worshiped the one god Savithu - The Sun God is as valid as the evidence I have cited where they worship the fire god, wind god, sea god, earth god, rain god. This cancels your evidence out.

Provide clear evidence the Vedic people actually considered the Sun God as the one true god

Again as cited many times before the Upanishads does mention all of the Gods which is mentioned in the Vedas and these gods were actively discussed in various discussions between Yajnavalkya, Gargi and Maitreyi and many of the Upanishads does mention about Hiranyagarbha and it is a fundamental tenet of Hinduism as Wikipedia itself obliges.

Of course they mention many gods, because it is a part of their tradition but ultimately they teach not about god/s, but the Self as the supreme reality. This is illustrated in the dialogue between Sakalya and Yagnavalkya where Sakalya asks him how many gods. Yajnavalkya responds with 33 and then reduces it to one:

He asked: 'Who is the one god?'

Yâgñavalkya replied: 'Breath (prâna), and he is Brahman (the Sûtrâtman), and they call him That (tyad).'

Sâkalya said : 'Whosoever knows that person (or god) whose dwelling (body) is the earth, whose sight (world) is fire 2, whose mind is light,--the principle of every (living) self, he indeed is a teacher, O Yâgñavalkya.'

...

Yâgñavalkya replied: 'I know that person, the principle of every self, of whom thou speakest. This love-made (loving) person, he is he." But tell me, Sâkalya, who is his devatâ?'

Near the end of the dialogue Yagnavalkya declares:

Yâgñavalkya said: 'In the Samâna 5. That Self (âtman) is to be described by No, no 1! He is incomprehensible, for he cannot be (is not) comprehended; he is imperishable, for he cannot perish; he is unattached, for he does not attach himself; unfettered, he does not suffer, he does not fail.'

Thus the Self is declares to be the supreme ONE

"Hiraṇyagarbha (Devanagari: हिरण्यगर्भः ; literally the 'golden womb' or 'golden egg', poetically rendered 'universal germ') is the source of the creation of the Universe or the manifested cosmos in Indian philosophy,"

It is surprising that someone who calls himself an expert on Hinduism is not aware of this which shows that you know nothing of Hinduism.

But your position is that our one and true god is Hiryangarbh, which is one deity or concept among many in the Vedas. The Vedas also use the word Purusha and Brahman. By the time of Vedanta the word the Vedas use to describe the one reality without a second is Brahman. This is no god, but refers to a universal principle or reality, which they call Atman or Self.

I am not concerned of atheists, at least they don't even enter into conversations like this and misrepresent religions. I am more concerned of people like you who are delusional having half-knowledge with no wisdom try to misrepresent Hinduism just because you can convert people into Hinduism.

Hinduism never tries to convert people into its religion like you're doing. Allow everyone to be free.

With all due respect, I am not the one who has started this thread preaching the one true and only god of Hindus is the Sun-God lol You obviously have not won in converts, because nobody actually agreed with you.

Yoga Yajnavalkya specifically states that the main purpose of Yoga is,

संयोगो योग इत्युक्तो जीवात्मपरमात्मनोः॥
saṁyogo yoga ityukto jīvātma-paramātmanoḥ॥
Union of the self (jivātma) with the Divine (paramātma) is said to be yoga.
—Yoga Yajnavalkya I.43

Yep

Paramatma is none other than Ishvara, The Sun-God.

No lol I have noticed a lot of the citations and evidence you provide to prove the Sun-God is our one and true god, don't actually say anything about the Sun-God. You provided in your previous posts two links to quantum physics - neither of them said anything about a Sun-God. Are you OK?

What? Don't make yourself sound silly. If you're an atheist go and find yourself an atheistic religion, don't come to Hinduism and argue that Hinduism is an atheistic religion which is basically a theistic religion and a Sun-God worshipping religion.

Okay, where shall I begin

1) Atheism is not a religion
2) Hinduism does have atheists
3) Hinduism is a sun-god worshiping religion AND a rain god worshipping religion AND a cow worshiping religion AND a rat worshiping religion and a thunder god worshiping religion AND a Shiva worshiping religion and a Vishnu worshiping religion AND a Kali worshiping religion. The biggest denomination of Hinduism is Vaishnavism, Vishnu worshipers. The second largest is Shiavism, Shiva worshipers and third largest is Shaktism, divine mother worshipers. Sun-worshipers comprise a very small percentage of Hindus.

Hindu philosophy is traditionally divided into six āstika (Sanskrit: आस्तिक "orthodox") schools of thought,[1] or darśanas (दर्शनस्, "views"), which accept the Vedas as supreme revealed scriptures. Three other nāstika (नास्तिक "heterodox") schools do not accept the Vedas as authoritative.

The āstika schools are:

Samkhya, a strongly dualist theoretical exposition of mind and matter, that denies the existence of God.

Yoga, a school emphasizing meditation closely based on Samkhya

Nyaya or logics

Vaisheshika, an empiricist school of atomism

Mimamsa, an anti-ascetic and anti-mysticist school of orthopraxy

Vedanta, the last segment of knowledge in the Vedas, or the 'Jnan' (knowledge) 'Kanda' (section). Vedanta came to be the dominant current of Hinduism in the post-medieval period.

The nāstika schools are:

Buddhism
Jainism
Cārvāka

Did you actually read the wikipedia article you linked?

I strongly advice you that you please convert yourself to one of these nastika schools and don't call yourself an Hindu which is an insult to all those who are Hindus, please don't do that.

I strongly advise you to not advise me in which religion I choose, I never asked your opinion lol I am Hindu from the Advaita Vedanta tradition and have been for now 15 years of my life. I have probably read more books on Hinduism and its scriptures than you have read books. I have been formally initiated into many yoga-tantra traditions. I have formally learned Vedanta in traditional ashrams. I also have a formal education in Indian philosophy.

You sound like somebody who just discovered Hinduism dear

Anyway, lets not get personal(for if you make any more personal comments like the above I will definitely report you) and stick to the discussion topic. If you actually read your own wikipedia link you cited, you would not miss this definition of what astika means "which accept the Vedas as supreme revealed scriptures"

Astika does not mean theist and nastika does not mean atheist. So yes dear, Hindus can be atheists, and most of the Hindu darsanas are indeed atheist or have very little room for God.

I am a Jnana yogi, for me knowledge is very important and I am rational and I go by evidence and other Hindus have not agreed with me because that's what happens when you give too much emphasis for the stories in the myths and Purunas rather than the knowledge in the scriptures. I don't really go after learning stories, I go after knowledge having practical practice performing Yoga and that's what happens when you give too much emphasis on Bhakti because it blinds the intellect and the wisdom.

I am Jnana and a Raja Yogi.

I am not sure you go by evidence. You seem to be denying all the evidence that the Vedic people did not just worship the Sun-God.

If you happen to remember I appreciated your posts which you made against the Bhakti movement in the begining but I diverged from your view when you called Advaitha is atheistic and compared god with flying spaghetti monster which was very unwise of you.

Advaita is ultimately atheist, whether you like it or not. Ishvara is called a product of Maya. By the way you are just as fanatical as the Bhaktas - I still can't make head or heads about what your actual position is.

Lets try to get more understanding on the heck you are on about. What do you mean by Sun-God?

 

[Pleroma]

Let me get this straight to you, atheism is dead, it is fundamentally flawed and your position on Hinduism and Advaita Vedanta is dead wrong as I will show it in this very thread citing evidence from science as well as from Hinduism. Keep watching. Well educated theists know what the truth is. Let's see who laughs at whom.

Okay, first thing first, how does the recent research in quantum mechanics along with the arguments of Bernard D'Espagnat shows that the holistic Sun-god is the one true god?

This is your question right, here is the answer.

Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality

Alain Aspect is the physicist who performed the key experiment that established that if you want a real universe, it must be non-local (Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance”). Aspect comments on new work by his successor in conducting such experiments, Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues, who have now performed an experiment that suggests that “giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned.”

Be clear what is going on here. Quantum mechanics itself is not crying out for such experiments! Quantum mechanics is doing just fine, thank you, having performed flawlessly since inception. No, it is people whose cherished philosophical beliefs are being threatened that cry out for such experiments, exactly as Einstein used to do, and with exactly the same hope (we think in vain): that quantum mechanics can be refined to the point where it requires (or at least allows) belief in the independent reality of the natural world it describes.

Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the illusion of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism.

You keep making pseudo-scientific claims that the Mind, Intelligence, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas etc are all matter which is fundamentally wrong as recent experiments from quantum mechanics as shown that the only thing that can be called real must be the human mind. The Bell experiments based on the EPR argument shows that attributes of a physical object such as spin, position, momentum etc don't exist independent of measurements and this is a well established fact.

Quantum researchers like Vladko Vedral and Bernard D'Espagnat have already concluded "Rather than passively observing it, we in fact create reality" and "What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind" respectively and Bernard is convinced that his research in quantum mechanics shows that this empirical reality (quarks, protons, electrons, atoms, brain and every physical object) doesn't exist independent of the human mind but is rather a retrospective creation of external metaphysical Manas and the metaphysical Jnanendriyas and Karmendriyas.

So your position that Manas, Buddhi, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas are all matter is fundamentally flawed and even the Upanishads, Vedas and Gita doesn't agree with you. This is what I call that you lack competent wisdom which our traditional scholars had and science itself has proved that our traditional scholars were absolutely right. Manas, Buddhi, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas are all made of God's stuff, they are not made of quarks, protons or anything as such. You better understand that first.

In arguing Sanatana Dharma two important words are essential one is Antharmukh and the other one is Bahirmukh. Bahirmukh means the mind which is like a rope is entangled with Jnanendriyas and this leads to the experience of the empirical reality and the ones who know the technique of Samyama can disentangle themselves from this metaphysical sense organs and only then they can see the real reality of the numinous world which is called as the Antharmukh. This is the problem I have with your position on Hinduism, you never make this distinction of Bahirmukh and Antharmukh without realizing that what we learn from science is one thing and what we learn from religion is another.

So once you have arrived at the conclusion that the empirical reality is only a state of mind using quantum mechanics you're not far away from knowing the holistic Sun-god.

"Narada Muni continued: What I referred to as the chariot was in actuality the body. The senses are the horses that pull that chariot. As time passes, year after year, these horses run without obstruction, but in fact they make no progress. Pious and impious activities are the two wheels of the chariot. The three modes of material nature are the chariot's flags. The five types of life air constitute the living entity's bondage, and the mind is considered to be the rope. Intelligence is the chariot driver. The heart is the sitting place in the chariot, and the dualities of life, such as pleasure and pain, are the knotting place. The seven elements are the coverings of the chariot, and the working senses are the five external processes. The eleven senses are the soldiers. Being engrossed in sense enjoyment, the living entity, seated on the chariot, hankers after fulfillment of his false desires and runs after sense enjoyment life after life. (SB 4.29.18-20)"

"Savithru(The Sun-God) deva is lord and master of Agnishoma mandala (pleroma of gods) and He is in the macrocosm as well in the microcosm. Human beings who are not aware of this imagine that it is they and their own mind and intellect that get things to be done through their ten sense organs. How can subordinates (the mind, intellect and sense organs) be independent? Imagining that he is independent, the individual attributes his achievement to his own mind and intellect. This amounts to the state of being enamoured and conceit. But those few who are capable of deep reflection realize that there should be one who inspires or activates the mind and intellect further reflection and contemplation leads such individuals to realize that the Inspirer or Activator is Savithrudeva. It is He and He alone who instil power into the intellect. It is the intellect, which is the centre and source of all activity, physical and mental, etc."

-Devudu

Who is the chariot driver? Yes exactly, its the holistic Savitru Deva.

 

[Pleroma]

Others have not agreed with me because the Brahmins of my state have preserved the purest form of Vedic Aryan religion and the translations of Gita, Upanishads and Vedic rituals are interpreted differently and this is the reason why no one is agreeing with me but the Brahmins from this state are wise and they don't squabble with other Hindus and we are going to revive Hinduism and we will unite Hinduism and no one can divide us and we all are One.

The Brahmins of South India are called as Smartha Brahmins and they never squabble with other Hindus because they are wise and know that the seers of Vedas worshipped their polythiestic gods in a holistic form as Savitur in whom all gods reside which is called as the Samasthi form of Vedic worship and hold that all Hindu sects are One.

Indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamaghnimāhuratho divyaḥ sa suparṇo gharutmān,ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadantyaghniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ"

They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutmān.To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan."(trans. Griffith)

Smarta Sampradaya (Smarta Tradition, as it is termed in Sanskrit) is a liberal or nonsectarian denomination of the Vedic Hindu religion which accepts all the major Hindu deities as forms of the one Brahman, in contrast to Vaishnavism, Shaivism, and Shaktism, the other three major Hindu sects, which revere Vishnu, Shiva, and Shakti, respectively, as the Supreme Being. The term Smarta refers to adherents who follow the Vedas and Shastras. Only a section of south Indian brahmins call themselves Smartas now.

It is most essential for Smarta Brahmins to specialize in the Karma Kanda of the Vedas and associated rituals diligently, and to teach the subsequent generations. This is the only reason that these families continue to be called Smartas.

Smarta Tradition includes the followers of all the six Darsanas (systems) of Hindu philosophy. The basic idea of Smartas was belief in Vedic practices. Vedas are non-sectarian . The Smartas found that you can not bring about a unity among different sects or revive the Vedic practices without bringing together the six systems of Philosophy. The Vedic rituals are based on Purva Mimansa. The Bhagavad Gita which contains the Sankhya and Yoga concepts is revered by the Smartas.

Smartha Tradition - Smartha Tradition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The well known philosopher Shankara was from South India and the Kannada Brahmins, a state which I hail from has preserved the purest form of Vedic Aryan Religion.

Kannada Brahmins (Devanagiri: कन्नड ब्राह्मण, Kannada: ಕನ್ನಡ ಬ್ರಾಹ್ಮ&#3235 are Brahmins whose mother-tongue is the Kannada language. Nearly all of them hail from the south Indian state of Karnataka. Kannada Brahmins are known to have preserved the purest form of Vedic Hinduism. It is in this region that the rituals and Vedic Chanting are done with great accuracy.

Kannada Brahmins - Kannada Brahmins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And the scholar Devudu Narasimha Shastry belonged to this particular school of Brahmins, therefore think twice before questioning the authority of the works of this scholar and obviously this purest form of Vedic religion is going to correct science. This time its esoteric religion which is going to correct science.

Devudu Narasimha Sastri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Surya Deva]

Let me get this straight to you, atheism is dead

No it's not, Atheists are still pretty strong today and there are billions who are atheists, agnostics or secular humanists. Why don't you go over the the Atheism DIR forum and ask them if they are dead? Moreover, the conclusion that reality may be made out of mind-stuff as opposed to physical stuff which is known as idealism is not the end of atheism, because there are also atheists idealists. Buddhists and Jains for instance are atheist idealists.

it is fundamentally flawed and your position on Hinduism and Advaita Vedanta is dead wrong as I will show it in this very thread citing evidence from science as well as from Hinduism. Keep watching. Well educated theists know what the truth is. Let's see who laughs at whom.

Lol, most of your so called evidences or definitive proof end up being a case of 2+2 = 5 - as in your evidence never actually adds up to your conclusion, and we will see again this time around it hasn't:

Okay, first thing first, how does the recent research in quantum mechanics along with the arguments of Bernard D'Espagnat shows that the holistic Sun-god is the one true god?

This is your question right, here is the answer.

Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality

Haha, I am sorry but I always have to laugh at your ideas that quantum physics has proven the Sun-God exists. Quantum physicists would laugh at your ideas. I have never seen a single quantum physicist say "This experiment proves the sun-god exists" lol

Often new-age people appeal to quantum physics to show that it has proven their new-age beliefs like auras, crystals, law of attraction, but the reality is quantum physics has done no such thing at all and the community of quantum physicists are bemused by all of this. But you take this inanity to extremes I have never seen before. Please quote me a single quantum physicist that says "The Sun god exists" In fact why dont you post this in the physics forum "Quantum physics has proven the sun god exists" I think you are in need of a reality check.

You keep making pseudo-scientific claims that the Mind, Intelligence, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas etc are all matter which is fundamentally wrong as recent experiments from quantum mechanics as shown that the only thing that can be called real must be the human mind. The Bell experiments based on the EPR argument shows that attributes of a physical object such as spin, position, momentum etc don't exist independent of measurements and this is a well established fact.

I am telling you what the actual philosophy of Samkhya from where these terms manas, buddhi, ahamkara, jnanaindriyas, karmaindryas etc come from says. They are all products of prakriti i.e., matter. This position is also accepted by Advaita Vedanta.

There is no division between mind and matter in the central Hindu philosophies, they are considered to be one thing. This is echoed in the modern philosophy of neutral monism, which says that mind and matter are simply two sides of the same coin.

Quantum researchers like Vladko Vedral and Bernard D'Espagnat have already concluded "Rather than passively observing it, we in fact create reality" and "What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind" respectively and Bernard is convinced that his research in quantum mechanics shows that this empirical reality (quarks, protons, electrons, atoms, brain and every physical object) doesn't exist independent of the human mind but is rather a retrospective creation of external metaphysical Manas and the metaphysical Jnanendriyas and Karmendriyas.

The views of some 'quantum researchers' does not represent the viewpoint of peers in the quantum physics community. The people you mentioned are considered fringe by peers. There is no proof in quantum physics that the human mind creates reality. There are several schools of thought in quantum physics: Consciousness measurement theory; multiple world theory; Bohm's theories. Neither of these theories are proven. There is still no consensus in quantum physics.

In terms of consciousness measurement theory both Schrodinger paradox and Wigners paradox show the impossibility of a human consciousness collapsing the wave function.

Again why don't you put your ideas to the test that quantum physics has proven that human minds create reality and post this proclamation of yours in the physics forum. I think you need a reality check.

So your position that Manas, Buddhi, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas are all matter is fundamentally flawed and even the Upanishads, Vedas and Gita doesn't agree with you.

No, actually they do. I showed you already the Upanishads consider mind to be matter made out of food matter. The Gita's account of creation and elements comes from Samkhya in the Samkhya-Yoga chapter of the Gita, and it also says the manas etc are products of prakriti as Samkhya philosophy also says.

This is what I call that you lack competent wisdom which our traditional scholars had and science itself has proved that our traditional scholars were absolutely right. Manas, Buddhi, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas are all made of God's stuff, they are not made of quarks, protons or anything as such. You better understand that first.

Something gives me the impression you are very young and have only recently started reading about quantum physics, Vedanta etc, no doubt from new age books lol

In arguing Sanatana Dharma two important words are essential one is Antharmukh and the other one is Bahirmukh. Bahirmukh means the mind which is like a rope is entangled with Jnanendriyas and this leads to the experience of the empirical reality and the ones who know the technique of Samyama can disentangle themselves from this metaphysical sense organs and only then they can see the real reality of the numinous world which is called as the Antharmukh. This is the problem I have with your position on Hinduism, you never make this distinction of Bahirmukh and Antharmukh without realizing that what we learn from science is one thing and what we learn from religion is another.

Inner and outer are both material(prakriti) according to Advaita, Samkhya and Yoga philosophy. As all these philosophies are based on Samkhya, here is how Samkhya explains the inner and outer division. The first product of unmanifest prakriti after it becomes manifest is Mahat(buddhi) From Mahat evolves ahamkara(ego) and from the ahamkara evolves the subjective and objective division of reality: in the subjective evolve the jnanaindiryas, karmaindriyas and manas. In the objective evolve the bhutas. In between the subjective and objective are the tanmatras. Respectively, they are known as the sattvic, tamasic and rajasic aspects of the ahamkara. It discussed in the Samkhyakarika(SK) the foundational text of the school:

SK 24. The ego is the assertion of identity, which divides the reality into "mine" and "not mine" subjective and objective divisions.

SK 25. From the sattva aspect of the ego principle the sense and motor organs evolve, and from the tamas aspect of the ego principle the 5 elements evolve. The Rajas aspect intermediates and energizes both.

SK 52. There is a dual subjective and objective evolution because they mutually serve one another. Without the subjective dispositions there would be no evolution of the objective and vis versa, thus both proceed simultaneously out of common purpose. (The consciousness requires objects of experience in the objective, these in turn produce the dispositions for its subjective evolution, which in turn rouse objective evolution to produce new experiences for it.)​

The modern term for this kind of philosophy where both physical matter and mind are seen as different aspects of the same substance is known as neutral monism.

In Yoga the inner and outer is ultimately transcended in Nirvikalpha samadhi.

So once you have arrived at the conclusion that the empirical reality is only a state of mind using quantum mechanics you're not far away from knowing the holistic Sun-god.

QM does not support the conclusion that empirical reality is a state of mind.
Again, why don't you test this conclusion of yours by posing it in the physics forum and getting expert opinions from physicists who post here on what the actual reality is.

"Savithru(The Sun-God) deva is lord and master of Agnishoma mandala (pleroma of gods) and He is in the macrocosm as well in the microcosm............

-Devudu

Where is this quote taken from? Can you give me a direct reference please.

Who is the chariot driver? Yes exactly, its the holistic Savitru Deva.

In this famous chariot analogy the purusha is just the witness who is a passenger on the chariot, and the driver is the intellect, the reigns are the manas, the horses are the senses and the roads are the sense objects. The purusha is just a witness a spectator. The purusha does not control anything. This all is done by prakriti.

 

[Pleroma]

No it's not, Atheists are still pretty strong today and there are billions who are atheists, agnostics or secular humanists. Why don't you go over the the Atheism DIR forum and ask them if they are dead?

Criticizing a doctrine is not the same as attacking the persons who hold that doctrine. There is a difference and you often take arguments personally rather than attacking their ideas. I have nothing personal with atheists but all evidence is pointing to a numinous existence and this atheistic doctrine is wrong and is almost a falsified and flawed position.

Moreover, the conclusion that reality may be made out of mind-stuff as opposed to physical stuff which is known as idealism is not the end of atheism, because there are also atheists idealists. Buddhists and Jains for instance are atheist idealists.

Shankara had strongly criticized the Buddhism philosophy, there is a lot of difference between Buddhism and Advaita. Buddhists cannot see the perspective of Advaita because they are atheistic where as Advaita is theistic and recognizes a noumenon of God.

Shankara criticized all these schools of thought of Buddhism.

(1) the Realists (Sautrantikas and Vaibhashikas), who hold that both consciousness and the external material world are real;

(2) the Idealists (Yogacara philosophers such as Vasubandhu), who maintain that consciousness-only is real; and

(3) the Voidists (Madhyamikas such as Nagarjuna), who claim that everything is void or empty.]

No further special discussion is required. From whatever points of view the Buddhist systems are tested with regard to their plausibility, they cave in on all sides, like the walls of a well dug in sandy soil. [Buddhist philosophy] has, in fact, no foundation whatever to rest upon, and thus it is foolish to adopt it as a guide in the practical concerns of life. Moreover, the Buddha,3 by presenting three mutually contradictory systems of philosophy — teaching respectively the reality of the external world, the reality of consciousness-only, and general emptiness — has himself made it clear either that he was a man given to making incoherent assertions, or else that hatred of all beings moved him to propound absurd doctrines that would thoroughly confuse all who might take him seriously. Thus, the Buddha's doctrine must be entirely disregarded by all those who have a regard for their own happiness.

- Shankara, Commentary on the Vedanta Sutras (Brahma Sutra Bhasya)

I'm not an idealist, I'm an Advaiti and all evidence has upheld this one particular doctrine. There are lot of mistakes in your version of Advaita which you have been preaching to us and I am well learned to know where one is going wrong citing irrefutable evidences to show you that your version of Advaita is flawed.

Lol, most of your so called evidences or definitive proof end up being a case of 2+2 = 5 - as in your evidence never actually adds up to your conclusion, and we will see again this time around it hasn't:

That is because you don't see what I see, so rather than making sweeping statements about my arguments ask me which part of it that doesn't make it sense for you. I'll clear it up.

Haha, I am sorry but I always have to laugh at your ideas that quantum physics has proven the Sun-God exists. Quantum physicists would laugh at your ideas. I have never seen a single quantum physicist say "This experiment proves the sun-god exists" lol

Who said QM proves that the Sun-god exists? The Scientific method cannot prove that a God exists. The method to prove that a God exists is Yoga not the scientific method. Got it?

I very well know how science works and I know what science is more than you do. The evidence from QM points only up to one thing i.e this empirical reality does not exist independent of the human mind and to arrive at this conclusion one needs to study QM.

Often new-age people appeal to quantum physics to show that it has proven their new-age beliefs like auras, crystals, law of attraction, but the reality is quantum physics has done no such thing at all and the community of quantum physicists are bemused by all of this. But you take this inanity to extremes I have never seen before. Please quote me a single quantum physicist that says "The Sun god exists" In fact why dont you post this in the physics forum "Quantum physics has proven the sun god exists" I think you are in need of a reality check.

I'm no new-age guy, I'm an Advaiti and belong to one of the six sects of shanmathas who worship the holistic Sun-God and it has been recognized by Shankaracharya as one of the important schools of Advaitic philosophy. If there is anyone who is a pseudo-advaiti then its you.

Again you often misquote my statements and laugh at yourself. No one said that QM says that the Sun God exists. QM says that this empirical reality doesn't exist independent of the mind. I really don't need that damn science to show that Advaita is right. Advaita stands on its own and Science is a different discipline and Advaita is a different discipline and the former is based on the scientific method and the latter is based on Yoga. Got it?

You have really misunderstood my position, I'm no new age.

I am telling you what the actual philosophy of Samkhya from where these terms manas, buddhi, ahamkara, jnanaindriyas, karmaindryas etc come from says. They are all products of prakriti i.e., matter. This position is also accepted by Advaita Vedanta.

No, they are all the products of God, not matter because QM has shown that matter itself comes from the Mind which is a creation of the Supreme Godhead. Got it?

There is no division between mind and matter in the central Hindu philosophies, they are considered to be one thing. This is echoed in the modern philosophy of neutral monism, which says that mind and matter are simply two sides of the same coin.

I said I'm an advaiti so I obviously accept the non-dualistic philosophy, no one is saying dualism is true but your position that Manas, karmendriyas, Buddhi etc are all matter is fundamentally wrong as QM as shown that matter is a creation of the human mind and the human mind is a creation of the personal God. This is the concept of Ishvara explicitly spoken in the literature of Advaita Vedanta.

The views of some 'quantum researchers' does not represent the viewpoint of peers in the quantum physics community. The people you mentioned are considered fringe by peers. There is no proof in quantum physics that the human mind creates reality. There are several schools of thought in quantum physics: Consciousness measurement theory; multiple world theory; Bohm's theories. Neither of these theories are proven. There is still no consensus in quantum physics.

Yoga and God provides self evident experiential knowledge that the human mind creates reality and the arguments of Bernard D'espagnat are rock solid and sound.

http://www.templetonprize.org/pdfs/2009_prize/The%20Quantum%20Theory_Sci%20Am%201979.pdf

These are sound arguments, not just mere speculation and experiments have confirmed it.

In terms of consciousness measurement theory both Schrodinger paradox and Wigners paradox show the impossibility of a human consciousness collapsing the wave function.

Again why don't you put your ideas to the test that quantum physics has proven that human minds create reality and post this proclamation of yours in the physics forum. I think you need a reality check.

Its you who need a reality check. Again what makes you think that I have not discussed this with quantum physicists? In fact they are in a better position to understand my arguments than the egoistic all knowing Advaitins who thought that they knew what Advaita is.

 

[Pleroma]

No, actually they do. I showed you already the Upanishads consider mind to be matter made out of food matter. The Gita's account of creation and elements comes from Samkhya in the Samkhya-Yoga chapter of the Gita, and it also says the manas etc are products of prakriti as Samkhya philosophy also says.

Matter is a creation of the human mind and the human mind, intelligence etc is the creation of Ishvara.

Something gives me the impression you are very young and have only recently started reading about quantum physics, Vedanta etc, no doubt from new age books lol

lol

There is no doubt that even after studying Hinduism for 15 years you have not understood Advaita at all. lol

Do you know why? That's the difference between studying the works of traditional scholars and the works of western academic scholars. You study the works of latter scholars where as I study the works of former scholars. That's the difference between you and me. You along with your western scholars cannot beat our traditional scholars.

As far as my study in QM is concerned you have got no idea.

Modern Physics - Raymond A. Serway, Clement J. Moses, Curt A. Moyer - Google Books

Amazon.com: Quantum Physics: A Beginner's Guide (Beginners Guide (Oneworld)) (9781851683697): Alastair I.M. Rae: Books

I deal with real science, not a proponent of pesudo-science like you do. Thanks for showing people as to what my credibility is.

Inner and outer are both material(prakriti) according to Advaita, Samkhya and Yoga philosophy. As all these philosophies are based on Samkhya, here is how Samkhya explains the inner and outer division. The first product of unmanifest prakriti after it becomes manifest is Mahat(buddhi) From Mahat evolves ahamkara(ego) and from the ahamkara evolves the subjective and objective division of reality: in the subjective evolve the jnanaindiryas, karmaindriyas and manas. In the objective evolve the bhutas. In between the subjective and objective are the tanmatras. Respectively, they are known as the sattvic, tamasic and rajasic aspects of the ahamkara. It discussed in the Samkhyakarika(SK) the foundational text of the school:

SK 24. The ego is the assertion of identity, which divides the reality into "mine" and "not mine" subjective and objective divisions.

SK 25. From the sattva aspect of the ego principle the sense and motor organs evolve, and from the tamas aspect of the ego principle the 5 elements evolve. The Rajas aspect intermediates and energizes both.

SK 52. There is a dual subjective and objective evolution because they mutually serve one another. Without the subjective dispositions there would be no evolution of the objective and vis versa, thus both proceed simultaneously out of common purpose. (The consciousness requires objects of experience in the objective, these in turn produce the dispositions for its subjective evolution, which in turn rouse objective evolution to produce new experiences for it.)​

The modern term for this kind of philosophy where both physical matter and mind are seen as different aspects of the same substance is known as neutral monism.

In Yoga the inner and outer is ultimately transcended in Nirvikalpha samadhi.

Matter is a creation of the human mind, matter is not out there in the external physical world, okay and the human mind, intelligence, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas are all the creation of Ishvara and this is the noumenon of world.

QM does not support the conclusion that empirical reality is a state of mind.
Again, why don't you test this conclusion of yours by posing it in the physics forum and getting expert opinions from physicists who post here on what the actual reality is.

Oh really?

Check this out?

Bernard d'Espagnat: What we call 'reality' is just a state of mind | Science | guardian.co.uk

Where is this quote taken from? Can you give me a direct reference please.

From the works of a traditional scholar named Devudu Narasimha Shastry.

"Devudu Narasimha Shastry (1896-1962) was a colourful personality and a polymath. He was a thinker and writer of unusual and extraordinary merit. A forceful speaker, he was equally a persuasive writer, and an indefatigable enthusiast for reformation and revolution within the ambit of tradition. He was chosen for the honour of being ‘worshipped’ in the ceremonial way, as one among the hundred traditional scholars, by the first president of India, Babu Rajendra Prasad, in the sacred Varanasi. He hailed from a family of royal priests in Mysore, but the stature that he had as a traditional scholar was acquired by him as a result of his systematic study of the shastras for 20 years.

Popularly known by his pen name ‘Devudu’, was not merely a great writer but like the seers who had the Vedas in vision, he gave visual shape to the Upanishadic verses in his transcendental work. "

Your version of Advaita is wrong and anyone who has read about Hinduism knows that Advaita is theistic, you are simply wasting your time and my time. So why don't you go and learn more about Hinduism rather than acting like you know everything.

In this famous chariot analogy the purusha is just the witness who is a passenger on the chariot, and the driver is the intellect, the reigns are the manas, the horses are the senses and the roads are the sense objects. The purusha is just a witness a spectator. The purusha does not control anything. This all is done by prakriti.

The master of purusha and prakriti is Savithru, Sun-god.

 

[Surya Deva]

Criticizing a doctrine is not the same as attacking the persons who hold that doctrine. There is a difference and you often take arguments personally rather than attacking their ideas. I have nothing personal with atheists but all evidence is pointing to a numinous existence and this atheistic doctrine is wrong and is almost a falsified and flawed position.

You said atheism was dead. I have shown you it is still very much alive and billions are still atheists on this planet. I have also shown you that even if QM has has proven that reality is made out of mind-stuff which is known as idealism, it still has not proven atheism to be dead, for there can be idealist atheists.

Shankara had strongly criticized the Buddhism philosophy, there is a lot of difference between Buddhism and Advaita. Buddhists cannot see the perspective of Advaita because they are atheistic where as Advaita is theistic and recognizes a noumenon of God.

Shankara criticized all these schools of thought of Buddhism.

(1) the Realists (Sautrantikas and Vaibhashikas), who hold that both consciousness and the external material world are real;

(2) the Idealists (Yogacara philosophers such as Vasubandhu), who maintain that consciousness-only is real; and

(3) the Voidists (Madhyamikas such as Nagarjuna), who claim that everything is void or empty.]

Yep I know Shankara refuted the Buddhists. But that has got nothing to do with my argument that Atheists can also be idealists, and I am giving you examples of Buddhist and Jain atheists who are idealists, to show you that even if QM has proven reality is made out of mind-stuff, it does not refute atheism. One can still be atheist and idealist. Such as myself, I am idealist and I am atheist at the same time.

I'm not an idealist, I'm an Advaiti and all evidence has upheld this one particular doctrine. There are lot of mistakes in your version of Advaita which you have been preaching to us and I am well learned to know where one is going wrong citing irrefutable evidences to show you that your version of Advaita is flawed.

No you are not, if you were Advaitist you would know that Advaita is a Monistic Idealist philosophy:

Monistic idealism holds that consciousness, not matter, is the ground of all being... Hindu idealism is central to Vedanta philosophy and to such schools as Kashmir Shaivism.[12] Proponents include Amit Goswami,[13] P.R. Sarkar and his disciple Sohail Inayatullah.

In recent years, a form of monistic idealism has been defended by the physicist Amit Goswami:[17][18][17][19]

Now, the opposite view is that everything starts with consciousness. That is, consciousness is the ground of all being.

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, a British astrophysicist of the early 20th century, wrote in his book The Nature of the Physical World; "The stuff of the world is mind-stuff";
"The mind-stuff of the world is, of course, something more general than our individual conscious minds…. The mind-stuff is not spread in space and time; these are part of the cyclic scheme ultimately derived out of it…. It is necessary to keep reminding ourselves that all knowledge of our envi-ronment from which the world of physics is constructed, has entered in the form of messages transmitted along the nerves to the seat of consciousness…. Consciousness is not sharply defined, but fades into subconsciousness; and beyond that we must postulate something indefinite but yet continuous with our mental nature…. It is difficult for the matter-of-fact physicist to accept the view that the substratum of everything is of mental character. But no one can deny that mind is the first and most direct thing in our experience, and all else is remote inference."[57]

Idealism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Who said QM proves that the Sun-god exists?

You did:

Okay, first thing first, how does the recent research in quantum mechanics along with the arguments of Bernard D'Espagnat shows that the holistic Sun-god is the one true god?

This is your question right, here is the answer.

Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality

The Scientific method cannot prove that a God exists. The method to prove that a God exists is Yoga not the scientific method. Got it?

Of course it cannot, then why were you claiming this earlier?
According to Yoga philosophy, even Yoga cannot prove God exists, for Yoga is about the realization of the Self or the witnessing consciousness. Yoga sutras confirm:

1.2 Yoga is the control (nirodhah, regulation, channeling, mastery, integration, coordination, stilling, quieting, setting aside) of the modifications (gross and subtle thought patterns) of the mind field.
(yogash chitta vritti nirodhah)

1.3 Then the Seer abides in Itself, resting in its own True Nature, which is called Self-realization.
(tada drashtuh svarupe avasthanam)​

I very well know how science works and I know what science is more than you do. The evidence from QM points only up to one thing i.e this empirical reality does not exist independent of the human mind and to arrive at this conclusion one needs to study QM.

No, it doesn't. Only a fringe group of quantum physicists believe it does, this is not the unanimous consensus of quantum physicists. There is still not enough empirical evidence to support the conclusion that physical reality does not exist independently of of human minds, and there have already been two attempts made by pioneering quantum physicists Schrodinger and Wigner to prove this false.

You need to your qualify your statement by saying which quantum physicists believe this and not speak for the entire field.

I'm no new-age guy, I'm an Advaiti and belong to one of the six sects of shanmathas who worship the holistic Sun-God and it has been recognized by Shankaracharya as one of the important schools of Advaitic philosophy. If there is anyone who is a pseudo-advaiti then its you.

Advaitins do not worship the Sun-God lol

Again you often misquote my statements and laugh at yourself. No one said that QM says that the Sun God exists. QM says that this empirical reality doesn't exist independent of the mind. I really don't need that damn science to show that Advaita is right. Advaita stands on its own and Science is a different discipline and Advaita is a different discipline and the former is based on the scientific method and the latter is based on Yoga. Got it?

QM has not proven that empirical reality does not exist independent of the human mind. Stop saying that, because it makes you sound ignorant about QM.

No, they are all the products of God, not matter because QM has shown that matter itself comes from the Mind which is a creation of the Supreme Godhead. Got it?

Advaita is not a theistic philosophy. We say everything comes from consciousness or everything is consciousness or everything is self. We don't say that the Supreme Godhead created this world. Not only are you misrpresenting here what QM says, but also what the philosophy of Advaita says.

I said I'm an advaiti so I obviously accept the non-dualistic philosophy, no one is saying dualism is true but your position that Manas, karmendriyas, Buddhi etc are all matter is fundamentally wrong as QM as shown that matter is a creation of the human mind and the human mind is a creation of the personal God. This is the concept of Ishvara explicitly spoken in the literature of Advaita Vedanta.

It is not my position that Manas etc are matter or maya, this is the position of Samkhya and Advaita.

Ishvara is absent in classical Samkhya philosophy and in Advaita Ishvara is considered a product of Maya.

Wrong as QM as shown that matter is a creation of the human mind and the human mind is a creation of the personal God.

Your grammar here seems to be suggesting QM has proven matter is a creation of human mind AND the human mind is a creation of a personal god. Please write more clearly. I am assuming you do not mean that latter part that QM has proven that human mind is a creation of a personal god, as you just said above modern scientific method cannot prove god exists. It is your responsibility to write clearly as possible to communicate your ideas to others to avoid confusion and misunderstanding. Earlier whatever you wrote suggested you thought QM proves the existence of the Sun God.

In any case you are misrepresenting both QM and Advaita here. QM does not say that matter is a creation of human minds and Advaita does not say that the human mind is a created by a personal God. In fact Advaita rejects a personal god.

Yoga and God provides self evident experiential knowledge that the human mind creates reality and the arguments of Bernard D'espagnat are rock solid and sound.

God provides self-evident experiential knowledge? This statements sound like God has personally told you lol

Its you who need a reality check. Again what makes you think that I have not discussed this with quantum physicists? In fact they are in a better position to understand my arguments than the egoistic all knowing Advaitins who thought that they knew what Advaita is.

As you don't seem to be aware that quantum physicists consists of several schools of interpretations and competing theories, and there is no consensus in the field.

 

[Surya Deva]

Matter is a creation of the human mind and the human mind, intelligence etc is the creation of Ishvara.

According to who? This is neither the position of QM or Advaita. Where are you getting this from? Please cite your references

Do you know why? That's the difference between studying the works of traditional scholars and the works of western academic scholars. You study the works of latter scholars where as I study the works of former scholars. That's the difference between you and me. You along with your western scholars cannot beat our traditional scholars.

You are being ignorant and making ignorant statements about where I have gained my knowledge. I have studied Hinduism through various means in the 15 years I have studied it from the age of 17. My engagement with Hinduism goes back to early childhood for I was born in an Indian Sikh family, and I grew up with Sikhism with no obvious difference between Sikhism and Hinduism, and watching the Mahabharata, Ramayana and Puranas and going Hindu temples. But It was not until the age of 17 when I started to formally take an interest in Hinduism. I started out by reading the Veda translations by the Arya Samaaj, which I use to study intensely and I read the Arya Samaaj magazine and got hold of every previous edition which now I understand was from a fanatical and nationalist point of view, but it familarized me with some key concepts and issues in Hinduism. It also spurred years of Vedic study of the original Samhitas by comparing and contrasting translations.

Later, I started reading the Gita(As it is) from the ISKON camp and attended a few meets. ISKON was not the group for me, so I joined some other Neo-Hindu groups like the Brahma Kumaris and started to practice meditation and had my first major spiritual experiences, but the BKS I found to be rather simplistic, so I left them. This brought me in touch with the Theosophical society, which was a syncretic organization based on Hindu, Buddhist and Western Occultist ideas, I met many esoteric and spiritual friends in this society and learned about new-age Hinduism related concepts from them, as well general new-age stuff like ufology, ascended masters, elementals, auras, psychic powers, mediumship, channeling, and involvement with Western Gnostics, Free Masons, Kabbalists contributing to my eclectic spirituality.

I realized that Hinduism seemed to be the common denominator behind all the new-age concepts I had learned in the Theosophical society, so I started to study the original scriptures of Hinduism(I had already studied the Veda Samhitas) I particularly liked the shastras like Yoga shastra, Vaiseshika shastra, Nyaya shastra and Samkhya shastra. I started to acquire knowledge on Hindu philosophy through self-study. This motivated my interest in taking my study to the next level I decided to major in Philosophy at University, looking particularly for degree courses with specific modules in Indian philosophy. Here I studied with Western philosophy and Indian philosophy. In fact in all my academic essays I brought in the Indian philosophy perspective. During this period I read hundreds of academic books and articles on Indian philosophy(mostly on Hindu philosophy) It was also during this period I was formally initiated into a Neo-Hindu Tantra Yoga tradition known as Ananda marga Yoga founded by Indian yogi/mystic/visionary Prabhat Sarkar, which brought me in touch with the Shaiva Advaita Vedanta Siddhanta.

I completed my university education by finishing a dissertation on Samkhya and Quantum Mechanics, and reconciling it in the end with Advaita. The conclusion of my dissertation was that reality needs to be redefined as a consciousness-field. After that, I decided I wanted to take my spirituality to the next level and find a guru, then I had romantic ideas about gurus, so I traveled to India. In India I studied with and consulted several Vedanta gurus, Hindu Pandits, yogis and swamis and deeply immersed myself in studying the traditional Vedanta, I also stayed at the most prestigious Vedanta ashrams following the tradition of Shankara. Here I studied the traditional texts more closely: The Upanishads, the Gita and the Brahma Sutras, and the prakaranas including the works of Shankara, Vedanta Sara, Panchadasi, Ashtavarika Samhita, Jeeva-Yatra, Drika-Drishya-Viveka.

I was then formally initiated into Tantra Kriya Yoga tradition, which ironically enough seemed to follow on from my previous Tantra Yoga engagements. After being deeply based in a Vedantic thought, my path took me to Tantra. This is where I currently am practicing a Tantric path from an Advaita point of view.

So this is my background and credentials in Hinduism, Yoga and Vedanta. Now your turn. Also how old are you?

As far as my study in QM is concerned you have got no idea.

Modern Physics - Raymond A. Serway, Clement J. Moses, Curt A. Moyer - Google Books

Amazon.com: Quantum Physics: A Beginner's Guide (Beginners Guide (Oneworld)) (9781851683697): Alastair I.M. Rae: Books

I deal with real science, not a proponent of pesudo-science like you do. Thanks for showing people as to what my credibility is.

You've read two books on quantum physics? I have read several dozens as part of my formal study in philosophy of science, as well hundreds of academic articles

Matter is a creation of the human mind, matter is not out there in the external physical world, okay and the human mind, intelligence, Jnanendriyas, Karmendriyas are all the creation of Ishvara and this is the noumenon of world.

You are just restating your argument/ideas/beliefs. I have just shown you with clear citations from the Samkhyakarika that mind and matter are both considered to be products of prakriti i.e., matter. What we call subjective and objective i due to the ahamkara which artifically splits the field of Prakrit into subjective and objective divisions, but in physical matter and mind are one causal system made out of matter. This position is known as neutral monism today in philosophy.

Whatever you believe is irrelevant to my the original argument that Samkhya and Advaita do not recognize a substance dualism between mind and body/mind and brain/mind and physical matter, they are considered considered part of prakriti/maya.

Oh really?

Check this out?

Bernard d'Espagnat: What we call 'reality' is just a state of mind | Science | guardian.co.uk

D'Espagnat does not represent the views of all quantum physicists.

From the works of a traditional scholar named Devudu Narasimha Shastry.

Lol, I knew it, your reference was not from Sruti, but from a modern source.

Your version of Advaita is wrong and anyone who has read about Hinduism knows that Advaita is theistic, you are simply wasting your time and my time. So why don't you go and learn more about Hinduism rather than acting like you know everything.

Advaita is not theistic. I know, I have studied all the core texts of this philosophy I would NOT be Advaitin if it was theistic, as I am closer to atheist.

 

[Pleroma]

Lol, I knew it, your reference was not from Sruti, but from a modern source.

Advaita is not theistic. I know, I have studied all the core texts of this philosophy I would NOT be Advaitin if it was theistic, as I am closer to atheist.

If you think that you know more about Advaita than our traditional scholars then there is no one more deluded than you are.