God in Vedas and Upanishads

From philosophical point of view an ideology that promotes the concept of eternal perpetuation of life, absolutely eliminates the need for a God/Creator altogether. Technically, it must eliminate the concept of evolution totally as well. In other words this ideology thus fails to provide the answers to two basic questions that human beings from across the planet have strived to answer through millinia. These two basic questions are:

1. Who we are and where did we come from? and

2. Where are we going i.e. what is purpose of our existence.

So if an ideology promotes that the purpose of life is to get recycled into different phases of material existence till eternity and beyond ,,,such as,,,birth of man turns into the death of man, and man turns into another life form like an animal or a bug or then recycled into a plant form back into human form till eternity then in principle we do not need a god to operate this perpetual motion machine. The need for a mutiplicity of gods is even further out of question. The question for evolution of man -physically and mentally- also becomes absurd. This idea does not satisfy our genetic urges to find the answer to the original questions that we explored in my earlier post:

i.e.

1. Our genes kick us to connect to One Creator and

2. The same genes kick us to rise above animals and start establishing rights and wrongs.

Even more depressing is the godless idelogy that promotes that that there is nothing more to life than our chemical structure. As it disintegrates it disintegrates completely. So in other words a wierd combination of chemicals can be called as life but in disintegrated form the same chemicals have no meaning. Interestingly enough for the past 3 or 4 centuries every western philosopher has struggled to get God out of the equation of good and bad. The works of Russel, Hume, Locke, Kant, Nietszce have been to find the answer to this question: ``Can we be good without God``. Yes, humanists claim that they can and they are good without God? but even a cursory look would tell that all the good that they claim as theirs, has been given to us by God.

I am being an Ahmadi Muslim, being hated by most so called Muslims. One of them is being called names without any reason.

I have to admitt that Islam has most substance and original thougth, it contains more philosophical depth; due to the reason that it solves age old quandry of humans about their understanding of their creator. Islam guides a human being towards clear recognization of God as much as that at the highest form one can be absorbed in God.

Ustruly have presented some very genuine questions, which need serious input from Our Hindu friends, if they can present one. Instead of calling him by names it would be worthwhile if someone can present some rational argument about ``if there was ever a unified concept of God after the original founder of Hinudism left this world``. Or if Hinduism in its present form is capable of explaining ``purpose of life`` and how to recongnize the ture God.

What is the ``tasaraf`` hold/purpose of religion on a person?

Example of HIndu friends is like who is ashmaed of their heritage, that is the reaon they try to hide their present form of scriptures. Either they present it in a language which is obsolete and no one ( 99.99999%) can not understand that dead language or they present selective chery picked quotes from upnashids which are derivatives from holy scriptures. They claim that God can express himself only in that language, and that also only in India, and that also some thousands year ago. As if God is now dumb and can not speak, can not speak anyother language except sansakrat, as if that imaginative God of thiers is not able to communicate in another language.

The modern twister and spinners come forward and try to insert in their Holy literature ideas and concepts which are not present them. To do so they employ subterfuge and heavy sounding words and ambigious pharases.

Is anbody have any idea what is the concept of God as presented by this article? as presented by Vedas or upnashids? an idea which is not self contradictory. Please share with us.

I have been asked why I presented so much material on Incarnation and Karma, where as the article is about concept of God in vedas and upnashids.

Is Incarnation and Karma seperate from God, as depicted in Vedas? or not they related.

Correct me if I am wrong, is this article saying that God has no bearing/relation with ``Mukti`` or salvation and God as presetned by current form of Vedas has no capability associated with Karma?

Please think. Deeper philosophy does not come just by claiming it, you have to have non-contradictory ideas, dont you?

Mr. Bhatnagar:

You make a mess in your explanation and articulation about Hinduism. ( Perhaps you might do the same thing had you been a member of some other faith too perhaps). Also there is good deal of trying to show off in using esoteric words. Why don`t you read and summarize comments by other knowledgeable and eminent writers of Hinduism?

To start with, please please go to a nearest public library and pick and read up a good book authored by a good academic before you write..

You would be better off sticking to differential and integral equations rather than making a fool of yourself here.

Kamath

Urstruly
Philosophically, why should there be a God referred to as a ``he``?

Why should the theory of reincarnation be antagonistic to the theory of evolution?

Long before western thought came into the picture Indic religions did try to get God out of the equation?

If there is a God why has so much evil been perpetuated by religions? You`d that God chap would get it right the first time, eh? Instead of making mistakes like us poor humans?

Rizwan
Why does Islam have more depth and originality? Because you were born into it?

Start with the premise that there is no God, you are just an animal like any other and think.

There is no original founder of Hinduism. It`s a set of evolving philosophies (evolving when people were concerned about God).

Hinduism is not absolute. It promotes various shades of thought.

Does the article say anything about Mukti or salvation? Does it say anything about Karma?

Deeper philosophy comes with contradictory ideas? Can you prove or disprove the existence of a God? Please think.

Can you or Urstruly provide one iota of proof that your theistic God exists? That he is nothing but a creation of your minds , living on rewards for good deeds, revenge for the bad ones, made in your image , not the other way around?

Do you understand this sentence ? `` Thus Brahman in Upanishads is both immanent in the world and transcendent of it. ``

Please think. Deeper philosophy does not come by claiming that everything that needs to be known is in one book. Other religions have claimed that too. They have sacked and destroyed libraries / invaluable sources of knowledge because of that .

One more thing, Hinduism claims no creator , read again in the article the translation of the Rig-Veda. The Universe came out of nothingness.
That is why we don`t have to debate on whether the earth was formed before the sun and moon , how the fourth day is the first day because the sun was created then etc etc etc ....

I know of no religion that is not full of contradictions. That is the spice of life.

My feeling is we will always talk at cross purposes because I reject the idea of an all knowing creator and you welcome it.

You are programmed by your belief in your religion to think in a certain fashion. My religion does not demand that I think on any lines. I can be an agnostic and a Hindu.

Any religion that says it is the only and one and true religion is in my opinion guilty of gross miscalculation.

And actually I don`t give a damn. No more posts from me on this topic.

``Example of HIndu friends is like who is ashmaed of their heritage, that is the reaon they try to hide their present form of scriptures``
``you have to have non-contradictory ideas, dont you?``


Think about the irony here! then you are whining you are being ``hated by Muslims``. Obviously, TRUE MUSLIMS have a belief (``NON-CONTRADICTORY``) that Mohamed is the final Prophet, either you should accept this and be a true Muslim or call yourself something else. I find your religion MOST-CONTRADICTORY. I am aware of your explanations about your Messiah, pls don`t go there. Despite all the negative things said about Islam, it is not difficult to sympathize with the TRUE MUSLIMS why they are upset with you.


You not only have bigoted opinions, and look at Hinduism from the vantage point of the religion you were born into.....you are not interested in understanding.


No one ``hides`` any scriptures....unlike religions based on one book a Hindu has the freedom of choosing what book he believes in .....if he doesn`t like any of them ...does not believe in any of these theories.........that`s fine.

If you think the transmigration theory is stupid ....perfect...you are entitled to your opinion. ALL THEORIES ARE OK. HOW DO YOU KNOW FOR SURE ONLY YOUR THEORY IS THE TRUTH?


The only underlying theme is we are all manifestations of the divine intelligence ..whatever you call it .....and you are free to interpret....life, world, the Universe......................

Re: # 37

``And actually I don`t give a damn. No more posts from me on this topic``

I agree with swarrier. Same from here. BYE!


p.s
I agree with Kamath also...the author has a made a mess here...using convoluted language....

Hinduism is like a Buffet. Your can pick and choose what you want. There are different GODs and you can take you pick. Pray to one or to all or non. There are some savory dishes like spiritualism and bhagti and some nasty dishes like caste system.

Islam is like a sit down dinner. The only problem is that once you have eaten there, you can not go eate anywhere else even if you hate the dish. Your have to eat what is offered to you, even if it kills you. Also you have to be in a manner of speaking dress for it. Like Beard and Hijab etc. You can not bad mouth the dinner or the chef, because if you do your fellow dinner are required to kill you.

Unfortunately, the self-evident truth, that, the idea of perpetual re-incarnation of life needs no god nor there is a need for a creator, nor there is room for evolution, was not discovered by me. It was discovered by another prince, the Prince of Kupilavastu, called Buddah. Buddah envisioned a world with no begining and no end, where life is recycled from one form to another till eternity and beyond, and only thing that is relavent in a certain life is the pain and suffering and corresponding love nd compassion of the human beings. So Buddah created the worlds first atheist religion where there is no god or dieties, no creator, no sustainer and no destroyer.

But interestingly, enough it is the very followers of Buddah who are still in search of meaning and purpose of life in their caves and monastries. And ironically, enough it is them who have turned Buddah into a pseudo-diety himself. Which only means that the purpose of life goes way beyongd the suffering and compassion. The eternal quest of man to find his Creator thus have continued.

Thinking about the fate of Dinosaurs, it does not take much of imagination to think that a single malignant virus can very well wipe the human race or all life from this planet from good. Thus breaking Buddah`s eternal cycle of life.

#3 SUBASHJOSHI


One thing I do not understand - if all souls emanate from supreme soul, and the ultimate goal of soul (Atman) is a union with supreme soul (Parmatman), then why does the whole thing begin in the first place? Why go through the mortal coil of millions of births to go back? May be a bad question, but...

Unfortunately, nobody or no religion has answered that question. To my mind, even Koran does not answer this question as to why did Allah create everything in the first place. What for??

(I think) only Atheism can give reply to your question--that is either creation is God`s helplessness or creation is inevitable-God or no God.

#6 TAHMED32


I followed Sanjay`s link to learn a bit more about hindu philosophy (about which other hindu posters below write approvingly) - and see this link to explain hindu philosophy starts with Islam is the most violent and intolerant faith that has ever been presented to mankind. . And the rest of the website is nothing but a ``hate islam`` diatribe.

Its true that AS`s website is a bit anti-islamic though he is not an out-an-out Islam-basher.

My purpose of providing the link was to see Hinduism through his eyes and not Islam. If we want to understand the true meanings of Islam then obviously his website is not the place.

Hope you got my point.

#4 URSTRULY


Hence we can conclude that the invention of multiple gods has served us no purpose.

Its true,I agree. Polytheism is confusing. Even Hindus of today question the relevence of 330 Million Gods and Goddesses. Either there is One God or there is no God at all. There cannot be more than One God(if at all God is there).

But we must remember that ``necessity is the mother of invention``. Hinduism started with Monotheism but later converted into Polytheism particularly with the advent of the ``Puranas``. All sorts of Gods,Elephant Gods, Monkey Gods, Tree Gods etc.etc. appear in the Puranas.(incidentally Puranpanthees i.e. ardent followers of Puranas, say that the word, Koran, has been derived from the word Puran--anyway thats not the question here).

There are two types of polytheism--one that exists in Greek Mythology and the other one which exists in Hindu Mythology. The Greek Gods & Goddesses i.e.Apollo, Aphrodite, Athena, Hermes, Zeus etc. were considered to be independent and abosolute in themselves. Whereas in Hindu Mythology, all the Gods and Goddesses are seen to be the manifestation of the single Brahm or Parmatma or simply Bhagwan. If you look into the qualities of Brahm or Parmatma or Bhagwan, it will be the same as God or Allah of Abrahmic religions like Single, Omnipotent, Omnipresent, without having male or female forms, without any partners, all powerful, creator, destroyer etc.etc. So, Hindusim is that not Polytheism as is normally understood.

Perhaps, Hindusim has turned polytheisist, because of the necessity over the time. Take for example, Kashmir Earthquake. We know today that the earthquake is a natural phenomenon and God has no role to play in it. If we believe that the quake was caused by Allah, then ,we are again moving towards the primitive religions where every natural phenomenon like rain, lighting was attributed to some God. But those who have suffered the earthquake are asking themselves why they have got this punishment?? For once, you can explain them that this is a natural disaster, which has nothing to do with Allah. But Kashmir is a quake prone area, quakes will continue to strike there--so may be one day it may happen that the sufferers may stop believing in God at all. You will agree that this will be the worst case. Now then, how will you convince them of Allah??

Answer-Polytheism-Hindu style!!!

Now how Hindu Philosphers explain their Polytheism is that for example consider a Lake or a Pond. Its full of water right. Now you take a bucket of water from the pond. The pond is still there but there is also a bucket with Pond`s water--which is now separate from the Pond. In other words, the Pond can be said be be made of thousands and thousands of buckets of water. Each bucket is separate yet it is one. Scientifically, this is the theory of whole and part. Each whole is a whole as well as each part is a whole and vice-versa. Now in the Hindu Trinity--Brahma is the creator and Shiva is the destroyer. Brahma does not wield any power over Shiva. Vishnu is the preserver who acts preserves Brahma`s creation from Shiva`s destruction. So when quake strikes, Shiva is at work and when there is no quake, Vishnu is at work. So this kind of juggelery atleast saves the Almighty from the getting the blame of human hardships and sufferings and escapes the wrath of mankind.

So you cant say that invention of multiple Gods has not served any purpose. It has. It has saved Single God from getting extincted.

#12-24 RIZWAN

You have written a chain of blogs covering hundreds of aspects--it would have been better if you had covered them one by one--for the simple sake of giving reply by others.

It is not that the replies,that too convincing, to your observations cannot be given. There are replies around there, its for you to find them out, if you interested. Even a moron like me can give replies to you, what to talk of higher souls. But justice cannot be done if the replies are given in a single go--it will take a minimum of one month to discuss the matter threadbare.

I am here touching just one aspect of your initial blog i.e. rebirth of humans in the lower forms of lives according to one`s Karma. You contention is that looking into the numerical strength of animal kingdom, the numerical strength of humans should be astronomically high.

If we go strictly by religion, then Bhagwadgeeta tells us, and rightly so, that there are two forms of matter--Living Matter and dead Matter. The dead matter is just a lump of matter whereas the living matter is also a lump of matter but woven around an entity called Atman--or Soul or Rooh. It is the soul in the living matter which guides its properties. Now soul, i.e. atman, is a part of Paramtma, which is infinite. Now the question comes is there One one type of Soul or different types of Souls--that is the soul of man and soul of a worm is the same or is it different?? If you say that the soul of man is different than that of a worm, them by simple logic, the soul of man is a part of different Paramatma and soul of a worm is that of different Paramatama. In that case, you have to agree for billions and billions of Gods, each corresponding to individual specie. But that does appear to be the case and religion also does not tells so. So, if Soul indeed exists then it is one i.e. part of a single whole.

Now, there are three visible parts of life--Plant Kingdom, Human Kingdom and Animal Kingdom. They are independent of each other. The last two will exist irrespective of each other( provided the Plant Kingdom survives). If all humans die today, animals will still exist. No that if all human die then there will not be any more humans to take lower forms of lives(according to their Karma) and thus animal kingdom should necessarily get extincted when all humans have died. All the religions deal with Human life and not animal or plant life. The Koran talks about the Day of Resurrection--the day when all humans will be raised and will be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. The Koran does not say that all animals will also be raised in the similar manner and the Lion will be asked whether he ate flesh or grass and the deer ate grass or trees. And the Lion and the Deer will be rewarded or punished accordingly. No, thats not the case.

The Karma talks about only Human life and not animals` life. It says, rightly or wrongly, that a man, after his death, has three possible destinations. The first one is Moksha i.e. he gets free from the cycle of life and death and disssolves in the eternity i.e. Paradise. The third one is Narak or hell where he has to burn till eternity. The second one is to return back either as human or lower form of life according to one`s deed. His Karma, will further, decide his ranking in the animal kingdom or Human Kingdom. If his Karma is excellant but does not qualify him for Moksha(the highest order), then his position will be raised in the Human Kingdom ,so on and so forth. If his Karma are worse, he will thrown into Animal Kingdom. Now, once he has been assigned animal kingdom, whether he has any chance to graduate to Human Kingdom. No. as far as I understand. He will attain Moksha straightaway from the Animal Kingdom. This is the way many Hindus explain, extinction of animal species..where have those animals gone..the answer..they have attained Moksha.

So, its a very complex subject. My friendly advice to you is better not get into all this super-natural things which has no answers. Simply go to Temple, Mosque or Church ,according to your religion, pray and try to be a good human being. Thats your Karma and the surest way of attaining Moksha i.e. you are posted in the Head-quarters.

#34 RIZWAN


``if there was ever a unified concept of God after the original founder of Hinudism left this world``. Or if Hinduism in its present form is capable of explaining ``purpose of life`` and how to recongnize the ture God.

I am afraid that the depth in which you want to understand Hindu concept of God,any Hindu would be able to explain you upto your conviction simply because Hindus do no think about their Religion and the concept of God, the way Muslims think. Muslims derive their identity from their religion, whereas, Hindus do not.

After going through all the scriptures etc., modern Hindu Philosphers talk about ek Eshwar i.e. One God. This single God has been described in detail in Bhagwadgeeta and the Cosmic Form for this Single God as decsribed in Bhagwadgeeta has been noted the world over.

On the society level, the Puranic Versions of God are more popular like Shiva, Durga etc. The union with God as envisioned in Geeta can be achieved through tougher methods like Meditation etc., whereas union with Puranic Gods is easier i.e. by visiting temples regularly, offering ``prasad``, worhshipping, singing hymns and songs in His praise, visiting ``CHar Dhams`` i.e. Four Places of Pilgrimage, so on and so forth.

Oveall people here dont care much about Hinduism and Godism. They want to keep it as a private affair only. Occasionally, during festivals, the religion is seen a factor strenghtenining social bonds so the festivals like Holi, Deepawali, Rakhi etc. are celebrated with gusto, pomp and show.

Beyond that people are generally not interested. Hardly anyone reads the scriptures, let alone discuss them.

Re: # 34 I would like to comment upon Mr Rizwans opinion about Hinduism. First of all there is no ``origianl founder `` of hinduism. This is a concept about which a `` kitabiya`` is more familier. This is beacuse the base of their religion is that there should be some founder upon whom a diviene book should be `` nazil``. Hinduism is described as `` sanatan dharma`` which by itself means that it has neither a beginning nor an end. There are several theories arising out of upnishads and they constitute main philosophises of Hinduism. Main among them are samkhya, advita, mimansa etc. Main philosophises in Hinduism can be divided into those who did not recognise authority of vedas( which by themself are ``a paurusheya`` meaning created not by any individual, and ``anadi`` and `` anant`` meaning they have no beginning and no end) and those philosophises which recognise the authoity of Vedas. In the former categorey ont can place a philosophy of ``Charvak`` who was a total materialistc person , Baudh darshan i.e. teachings of Lord Buddha and the Jain or Arhat philosophy i.e. teachings of Lord Mahaveer. The main aspect of difference in these various philosophies are the tools by which a thing should be concluded . These tools are ``pratyaksha`` meaning real ``anuman`` meaning inference ``shabd``meaning what ved says etc. It is no doubt that Islam is a great religion but the base of all semetic religions is the life after death and hence ``kiyamat`` and the judgement day. In fact the beauty of Hinduism is it tolerates and accepts that there might be many diverse views about ultimate truth. All these views are recognised, studied and respected by Hinduism.There is one ``shloka`` Akashat patitam toyam yatha gachati sagara sarva dev namskara Keshawam prati gachati`` meaning as the water falls on earth and it ultimately goes to sea so like one prays to any god the prayer goes to Keshav.

I wonder here is the author ``ushil Bhatnagar is ? even after appearance of 47 posts? I hope he would reply to some posts atleast!
Kamath