Who is our True God? (Hinduism)

[Shuddhasattva]

Vedic mandala is Agamic yantra, more or less.

Also, one of the Vedic gods - the 11th Rudra, Tryambakam Rudra, is Atman.

 

[Pleroma]

The one true God is the set of natural laws that governs the multiverses. There is no scientific evidence of any other.

Some of the eastern religion’s gods are much closer to it/him/her then the Abrahamic version who has to be the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

It was only the Valentinians who saw the goodness of Abrahamic God. Which most people don't see.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

I certainly don't see it.

 

[Riverwolf]

No, I'm not referring to the atman just yet, that's beyond jagat but the physical personal Sun God is with in jagat.

Question: if this Sun God is physical, where, exactly, is it physically in the body?

The Gayatri mantra was not made up, it was discovered by Vishwamithra from the Agnishoma mandala and it reads as Savithru.

What does Savithru mean?
Savitru is Sanskrit in origin and its meaning is the sun, yielding or generating.

Do you want God to change his name? If you want then I am not arguing with you.

God has no Name beyond what we've given Him. Names are a human invention to distinguish and identify.

Composing a poem and "making up" a poem aren't the same thing. All poems, from the Sacred to the vulgar, come from Saraswati, what we in the West refer to as the Muse.

That cannot be decided like that, who knows the whole Vedas might be made up. Only the one who conquers death and achieves immortality by re-birth knows the true path. Let's see who achieves that.

We all will at some point. There is no challenge here.

No, that implies one of the assumptions of science is wrong and scientific realism is a serious contender to be wrong and it implies that we have to give up our belief that physical objects exist independent of the mind.

Again: slow down. I have no idea what you're talking about here. That scientist clearly stated that the empiricle reality, that is, the reality that the senses are able to detect, is not completely created by the mind.

Read this scientific american paper.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/pdf/197911_0158.pdf

It is based on this that I am arguing that the interpretation of Vedas by that scholar is the correct and the valid one. There is science and philosophy behind it to support my claims.

Quite a long article. Are you sure you understand it properly? I'm positive that I wouldn't. I'm a budding computer scientist, not a physicist.

If there's one thing I've learned about quantum science and its relation to most people, it's that, for the most part, only actual quantum physicists understand it fully and properly, due to all the nonsense that those charlatens who don't understand it but misuse its terminology and concepts to subtly advertise products, or gain followers.

Yantras means different things here, you need to define it.

Sacred geometrical shapes. You know, like the Sri Yantra?

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Shapes which indicate assemblies of deities. The Sri Yantra, for example, has a shakti/shakta at every angle, on the petals, etc.

 

[ratikala]

dear nameless ,

ratikala ji,

i completely disagree ..

i just received a warning from a moderator coz i talked about other faiths, and my last post got deleted. So im virtually locked to respond to your posts against sam harris. Pls carry on bashing( without abstaining from 8 fold principles) sam harris

I beg your pardon if my comments offend regarding sam harris , I am not bashing mr harris simply pointing out that one canot speak out against faith in such a selective manner without someone raising the question of devisiveness .

I didnt bring him into the equasion I simply posted his details as I was not the only one who didnt know of him .

 

[Vinayaka]

Why not just start another thread on Sam Harris? That seems simple enough.

 

[ratikala]

dear prabhu ji

I happen to agree with Mr. Harris. Shraddha means more than faith, and actually also describes attention to that lord awareness who dwells between thoughts - and even within thoughts.

does mr harris speak on shraddha ?

I have found that deliberately letting go of beliefs, even treasured ones, sacrificing them to that which is beyond belief, will either dissolve beliefs into greater truths, or reinvigorate them. As you are sacrificing the belief to the ineffable and inconceivable it alludes to, there is no betrayal.

in principle I can agree with this but only as a personal exploration of ones sadhana, I cant tell someone else to do it ?

I applaud Mr. Harris' efforts and could not agree more with:

I do not know mr harris well enough to truely judge but from what little I have read for me sorry but no thank you .

If there is destructiveness here, I see it as creative destruction needed to pave the way to religion purged of superstition and purified by reason, that is in harmony with science and technology, and thus able to guide the two to better conclusions than we now see.

this I can agree with in principle,
but only that one may destruct within ones own constructs but not others ???

Beliefs are responsible for both holding people back from the living experience, as well as misguiding people towards disastrous courses of action.

but many beleifs also make positive contributions to the world and human welfare

 

[nameless]

namaste mata ji,

one canot speak out against faith in such a selective manner

the same can be one such problem he finds with various faiths, may be because he understands those faiths bit differently than you do, then what he is doing is almost the same what you have been doing here.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Do you really know what the soul is? Are you an enlightened being? Are you a free man?

I have simply stated the scriptures. The scriptures reveal about soul, karma, liberation etc.

By the way, do you really know what the soul is? Are you an enlightened being? Are you a free man?

Repeating the same questions won't change the answers. You want me to repeat again then listen.

You have not answered the question, my friend. You are avoiding answering to the point... I wonder why?

Bhagvad Gita, chapter 2, verse 70, Sankhya Yoga.

Only the one who is stithaprajna attains peace and therefore krishna has no desires, he neither wants to kill anyone nor he wants to save one, he neither cares whether Arjuna goes for war nor if he doesn't go. That statement should be understood in that way, Krishna only gives all the advice for Arjuna and leaves it to nature to take actions.

Krishna is always at peace and smiling.

Okay. How does that explain the freedom of choice 'free-will' Krishna wants Arjuna to exercise, when He said "...and then do what you wish to do."

Can you explain, if there is no free-will, then what is the meaning/significance of this one line by Kṛṣṇa to Arjuna "...and then do what you wish to do."; without beating around the bush? If you cannot, it is okay!

Says Krishna

Really? How come I do not see anything here that supports: When your mind is in Sattva guna you will automatically surrender to God...

Bhagvad Gita, chapter 14, verse 19. Guna-Karma Vibhaga Yoga.

One cannot be free as long as one is subjected to gunas, it is the gods who script our lives, we don't have free will.

One cannot be free is different and one cannot have free-will is different. Please do not confuse the two.

If I am in a jail, I am not a free man. Still, withing the jail, I have the freedom to choose what I want to do.

Similarly, I am in a body (jail) of three gunās. There is no freedom from this body (jail), till I complete my sentence (body dies). I have acquired this body (jail) as a reaction to my past actions. However, I have a minute free-will, because of which I will do actions, by willing, and through my body. The reaction of these actions will determine my future body (jail).

So, though we are not free; the free-will is there.

I have already addressed it.

I had asked, if there is no free-will, then why did Lord tell Arjuna: "...just surrender unto Me."

Can you explain, if there is no free-will, then what is the meaning/significance of this one line by Kṛṣṇa to Arjuna "...just surrender unto Me."; without beating around the bush? If you cannot, it is okay!

 

[Pleroma]

Question: if this Sun God is physical, where, exactly, is it physically in the body?

We all will at some point. There is no challenge here.

Again: slow down. I have no idea what you're talking about here. That scientist clearly stated that the empiricle reality, that is, the reality that the senses are able to detect, is not completely created by the mind.

Quite a long article. Are you sure you understand it properly? I'm positive that I wouldn't. I'm a budding computer scientist, not a physicist.

If there's one thing I've learned about quantum science and its relation to most people, it's that, for the most part, only actual quantum physicists understand it fully and properly, due to all the nonsense that those charlatens who don't understand it but misuse its terminology and concepts to subtly advertise products, or gain followers.

I'm an engineer in Information science and I have good background in physics and I have got other works to do and I'm not going to be in this forum for too long and I don't need any followers behind me. Do you doubt my credibility?

Its something which is being discussed by various scientists, scholars and philosophers around the world. I think you're not aware of it.


Sample Chapter for d'Espagnat, B.: On Physics and Philosophy.

https://papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/jspui/bitstream/1866/4866/4/Duquette_Jonathan_2010_these.pdf

[]QUANTUM PHYSICS AND VEDANTA[]: A PERSPECTIVE FROM BERNARD D'ESPAGNAT'S SCIENTIFIC REALISM - Duquette - 2011 - Zygon® - Wiley Online Library

Introductory essay - ISSR Library

That clearly shows that we are in a Veiled reality as Bernard d'espagnat says and our empirical reality is brought into existence by the entanglement between the metaphysical sense organs called Jnanendriyas in Sanskrit and the metaphysical mind called Manas in Sanskrit.

It also shows that intelligence exists in platonic realms and if you're a computer scientist then you might know what its implications are. Strong Platonists like Roger Penrose have argued that strong AI is impossible and eastern religions shows that it is true and if you can come up with a machine capable of strong AI then these religions will be disproved.

As for the question of where the Sun God exists. No, he doesn't exist in the body nor in the brain because as Bernard says even those fall under empirical reality and someone asked if what we call empirical reality is only a state of mind then what is mind? No one had an answer to it. Cognitive scientists are reductionists and they reduce everything to brain but even that falls under empiricism so we know, I mean the traditional scholars of eastern traditions know that a metaphysical mind exists which is responsible for the retrospective creation of our empirical reality.

As shown in that figure what's behind the metaphysical mind is the intelligence called as Bhuddi and what's behind that is the Paramathma, the Lord.

This is the essence and meaning of Gayatri mantra, Dhiya yona Prachodayath. He is the one who stimulate our intellect and make us do noble works.

So you know now where the Sun God exists. This is the true wisdom of the scriptures which I have learned from my study.

God has no Name beyond what we've given Him. Names are a human invention to distinguish and identify.

Composing a poem and "making up" a poem aren't the same thing. All poems, from the Sacred to the vulgar, come from Saraswati, what we in the West refer to as the Muse.

I told you I don't argue with such sensitive issues like Gayatri Mantra and nor should anyone.

Sacred geometrical shapes. You know, like the Sri Yantra?

Yes that's what Carl Jung said, these geometrical shapes represent the wholeness of those deities in this phenomenal world and those deities exist in the mandalas. James Hillman said Gods are real, they are everywhere in all aspects of human existence and in all aspects of human life.

The Red Book of Carl Jung shows that these gods do exist in our psyche and they are alive and well as Adams says. This is what archetypal psychology or the polytheistic psychology is based on. It is based on mandalas.

 

[ratikala]

dear prabhu ji

namaste mata ji,


the same can be one such problem he finds with various faiths, may be because he understands those faiths bit differently than you do, then what he is doing is almost the same what you have been doing here.

vinayaka is right to say it should possibly be discussed outside of this thread ,
personaly I do not mind what he says providing he does not make sweeping statements condeming an entire faith on the actons and beleifs of some of that faiths adherants .....which is what it appeared from what I read ?

 

[Riverwolf]

I'm an engineer in Information science and I have good background in physics and I have got other works to do and I'm not going to be in this forum for too long and I don't need any followers behind me. Do you doubt my credibility?

Its something which is being discussed by various scientists, scholars and philosophers around the world. I think you're not aware of it.


Sample Chapter for d'Espagnat, B.: On Physics and Philosophy.

https://papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/jspui/bitstream/1866/4866/4/Duquette_Jonathan_2010_these.pdf

[]QUANTUM PHYSICS AND VEDANTA[]: A PERSPECTIVE FROM BERNARD D'ESPAGNAT'S SCIENTIFIC REALISM - Duquette - 2011 - Zygon® - Wiley Online Library

Introductory essay - ISSR Library

That clearly shows that we are in a Veiled reality as Bernard d'espagnat says and our empirical reality is brought into existence by the entanglement between the metaphysical sense organs called Jnanendriyas in Sanskrit and the metaphysical mind called Manas in Sanskrit.

It also shows that intelligence exists in platonic realms and if you're a computer scientist then you might know what its implications are. Strong Platonists like Roger Penrose have argued that strong AI is impossible and eastern religions shows that it is true and if you can come up with a machine capable of strong AI then these religions will be disproved.

As for the question of where the Sun God exists. No, he doesn't exist in the body nor in the brain because as Bernard says even those fall under empirical reality and someone asked if what we call empirical reality is only a state of mind then what is mind? No one had an answer to it. Cognitive scientists are reductionists and they reduce everything to brain but even that falls under empiricism so we know, I mean the traditional scholars of eastern traditions know that a metaphysical mind exists which is responsible for the retrospective creation of our empirical reality.

As shown in that figure what's behind the metaphysical mind is the intelligence called as Bhuddi and what's behind that is the Paramathma, the Lord.

This is the essence and meaning of Gayatri mantra, Dhiya yona Prachodayath. He is the one who stimulate our intellect and make us do noble works.

So you know now where the Sun God exists. This is the true wisdom of the scriptures which I have learned from my study.



I told you I don't argue with such sensitive issues like Gayatri Mantra and nor should anyone.



Yes that's what Carl Jung said, these geometrical shapes represent the wholeness of those deities in this phenomenal world and those deities exist in the mandalas. James Hillman said Gods are real, they are everywhere in all aspects of human existence and in all aspects of human life.

The Red Book of Carl Jung shows that these gods do exist in our psyche and they are alive and well as Adams says. This is what archetypal psychology or the polytheistic psychology is based on. It is based on mandalas.

Good. Then, it's as I said before: philosophically, I do not ultimately disagree with you. It's your choice of words that's causing confusion, and which I disagree with. Hiranyagarbha is not separate from the other Gods, and so in worshiping Siva, I worship Hiranyagarbha, and in your worship of Hiranyagarbha, you're also worshiping Siva. There is no One True God, just different names referring to the ultimately Nameless. "The Wise refer to what is One with many Names." (Man I love that verse.)

BTW, I said I'm a budding computer scientist. That means I'm still learning how to program in C/C++ (set to learn OOP C++ next college semester, along with assembly language), and in particular I'm intending to go into game development and design. (I'm actually first and foremost a Storyteller, which is why I tend to gravitate towards mythology.) So, actually, I was not aware of intelligence existing in the platonic realms... which I've never heard of.

But this venture has helped contribute to my philosophy: the idea of the manifest and potential is identical to the binary numerical format, which contains only 1s and 0s, yet is capable of representing virtually anything.

 

[Pleroma]

To summarize the paper "The Quantum Theory and Reality" by Bernard D'espagnat, The violation of Bell's inequality implies that one of the assumptions of science must be wrong.

1. The three premises of Scientific Realism
2. The method of Induction
3. Einstein Separability

http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/pdf/197911_0158.pdf

It now turns out that even this renunciation is not entirely satisfactory. Even if quantum mechanics is considered to be no more than a set of rules, it is still in conflict with a view of the world many people would consider obvious or natural. This world view is based on three assumptions, or premises that must be accepted without proof. One is realism, the doctrine that regularities in observed phenomena are caused by some physical reality whose existence is independent of human observers. The second premise holds that inductive inference is a valid mode of reasoning and can be applied freely, so that legitimate conclusions can be drawn from consistent observations. The third premise is called Einstein separability or Einstein locality, and it states that no influence of any kind can propagate faster than the speed of light . The three premises, which are often assumed to have the status of well-established truths, or even self-evident truths, form the basis of what I shall call local realistic theories of nature. An argument derived from these premises leads to an explicit prediction for the results of a certain class of experiments in the physics of elementary particles. The rules of quantum mechanics can also be employed to calculate the results of these experiments. Significantly, the two predictions differ, and so either the local realistic theories or quantum mechanics must be wrong.

-Bernard D'espagnat

It is for this work The John Templeton organisation gave the Templeton prize to Bernard d'espagnat for establishing the connection between religion and science.

 

[ratikala]

dear pleroma ,

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratikala
then why are we discussing this subject ?

Its the prakriti which chooses whether you discuss it or don't discuss it.


Quote:

if everything is pre ordained and free will has no part to play , in which case how can you enlighten another ?????

Who said that just by reading a verse of Bhagvad Gita one gets enlightened, only when the prakriti allows him to get enlightened only then the soul gets liberated.

What will be the state of a person one who has achieved Sarvajnya?

if this is so why are you trying to convince us , surely prakriti will have us realise when prakriti is ready ???? .....then what need is there for us to do anything ????
sorry it dosent make sence !

"What will be the state of a person one who has achieved Sarvajnya?"

sarvajna ? ... enlightenment , all knowing .

you are arguing over apparently contradcting verses in the gita yet not concidering ultimate and conventional realitys .

ultimately nothing moves without sri krsnas sanction .

but in the conventional level krsna grants us free will to come to this realisation in our own time , under our own volition , and with certanty , .... thus we may atain an enlightened state of being .

 

[Pleroma]

BTW, I said I'm a budding computer scientist. That means I'm still learning how to program in C/C++ (set to learn OOP C++ next college semester, along with assembly language), and in particular I'm intending to go into game development and design. (I'm actually first and foremost a Storyteller, which is why I tend to gravitate towards mythology.) So, actually, I was not aware of intelligence existing in the platonic realms... which I've never heard of.

That idea of "intelligence" existing in platonic realms exist from the time of Plato and Gödel too was a strong Platonist.


“Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine.”

– Kurt Gödel

“Gödel’s Theorem shows that human thought is more complex and less mechanical than anyone had ever believed”

- Rudy Rucker

Roger Penrose just established Gödel's ideas on a much firmer ground and all computer scientists don't agree with him.

The Third Culture - Chapter 14

Only his mathematical argument is well established and his model of consciousness is just speculation and scientists dub it as pesudoscience. So I only take his mathematical arguments seriously because he is a mathematical physicist.

 

[Pleroma]

dear pleroma ,

if this is so why are you trying to convince us , surely prakriti will have us realise when prakriti is ready ???? .....then what need is there for us to do anything ????
sorry it dosent make sence !

As Shuddhasattva said just by holding the belief in Hiranyagarbha will not give you liberation, one should implement it in practice in his life and achieve a practical understanding, its a practical skill or knowledge. I really don't have that practical knowledge so I'm not here to enlighten you, stop saying that please.

That's not the point of this thread, the point is to stimulate intensive research in mandalas of Vedas and the secrets of Upanishads, I don't go by blind faith.

sarvajna ? ... enlightenment , all knowing .

you are arguing over apparently contradcting verses in the gita yet not concidering ultimate and conventional realitys .

ultimately nothing moves without sri krsnas sanction .

but in the conventional level krsna grants us free will to come to this realisation in our own time , under our own volition , and with certanty , .... thus we may atain an enlightened state of being .

Yes, Sarvajna means all knowing and also a Jivanmukta, the one who has achieved mukti while one is alive and such a person has no worries, he doesn't even know what his name is or what the address of his house is, the information comes to him whenever only it is necessary and when he interacts with this world and at other times he is at peace and that's why he is called a freeman, a Jivanmaukta.

Now when we are being forced to do everything by nature and subjected to the forces of nature how can we be free, the Jiva is still in the knots of prakriti and that's why enlightenment is required to know that you are Brahman. If you are free already then why do you require enlightenment in the first place?

 

[nameless]

dear prabhu ji
personaly I do not mind what he says providing he does not make sweeping statements condeming an entire faith on the actons and beleifs of some of that faiths adherants .....which is what it appeared from what I read ?

namaste mataji,

as far as i know, he is of the opinion that faiths itself is the problem, and not the fault of any of its adherents. It is in this video

 

[tumbleweed41]

Mod Post


This thread has been moved to Same Faith Debates.

Please observe that DIR rules still apply, other than debate, and the thread is reserved for those of Hindu faith only.
​

 

[Skeptisch]

The Red Book of Carl Jung shows that these gods do exist in our psyche and they are alive and well as Adams says.

Jung believed in astrology, spiritualism, telepathy, telekinesis, clairvoyance and ESP. In addition to believing in a number of occult and paranormal notions, Jung contributed two new ones: synchronicity and the collective unconscious.

What an authority…his "collectively unconscious fans" have followed him ever since.
:magic: