Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: God is not in the statue

  1. #1
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Age
    52
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    God is not in the statue

    God is not in the statue

    When you are an item of creation, your ways and efforts cannot be supernatural and they must follow the natural rules of creation, which are again science only. Therefore you must use the logical scientific analysis in analysing yourself and your path to reach God. But God is beyond this creation who is the Creator. Therefore God cannot be analysed by science. When the goal is above science the scientific path cannot be meaningful because the scientific path will lead to such goal only, which can be analysed by science. For e.g.: let us take the path to Bombay, the path is on the Earth and Bombay is also on the Earth. A path that can be analysed by logic can reach the goal, which must be also analysed by the logic.

    If I start the journey to God and ask the path to reach Him, nobody can show the path because the God is invisible. An invisible goal will always have an invisible path. Nobody can travel in invisible path. One can show the path to a holy temple. If God exists in the statue, such path is a true path. The main purpose of reaching God is to know the whole knowledge of yourself, the correct path and the correct goal. The reason is that God is the best preacher since all the matters are related to God. Therefore the Human Incarnation is the correct place of God. The human incarnation consists of a visible human body so that the path to reach Him also becomes visible. Since God is in the human incarnation, by reaching that human body you have reached God. In fact God pervaded all over the body and you have reached the God. The God becomes visible through human body and therefore the path to reach God is also visible.

    The main purpose to reach God is to hear the correct version of the entire spiritual knowledge. Then through service you have to please the God. In the case of statue, it is not preaching any trace of knowledge. Moreover when we serve the statute it is not appearing pleased on its face. Due to these two reasons neither God is in the statute nor God is the statute (Na tasya Pratima- Veda). The statute in the human form is a model to indicate the human form of the Lord. The ignorant human beings who cannot accept the human form of the God due to egoism and jealousy can worship the statute as training for sometime to worship the human form of Lord in future (Pratimahyalpa Buddhinam- Smruti). But one should not sit in the training through out his life. If he sits in the training only, he is born as an inert object like stone (Bhutejya yanti- Gita)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Posts
    640
    Rep Power
    109

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Quote Originally Posted by vishal View Post
    But God is beyond this creation who is the Creator.
    Namaste Vishal,

    Does this not violate a central Hindu principle that God is immanent in His creation? This is held true by all Hindu denominations and sects. What you are saying is that God is completely transcendent. "God is watching us from a distance" is contrary to Hinduism.

    Therefore the Human Incarnation is the correct place of God. The human incarnation consists of a visible human body so that the path to reach Him also becomes visible. Since God is in the human incarnation, by reaching that human body you have reached God. In fact God pervaded all over the body and you have reached the God. The God becomes visible through human body and therefore the path to reach God is also visible.
    God is only found in the human incarnation and nowhere else can only be true if you believe God is absolutely separate and aloof of creation. Again this is contrary to Hinduism.

    Due to these two reasons neither God is in the statute nor God is the statute (Na tasya Pratima- Veda).
    Na tasya pratima asti has been used over and over to argue the point you've presented. The term pratima can also mean comparsion. This phrase appears in the Shukla Yajurveda and repeated in the Shvetashavatra Upanishad. Here's the hymn, and the context in which it appears:

    Viewed in the context of the first verse, this claim is tenuous [that pratima means statue], at best. The image or mūrti icon is a symbol of the supreme power and this symbol is used in the Veda many times. Recall the famous Purusha hymn in [RV 10.90] or in chap. 31 where the Supreme Person is symbolized by a being of innumerable heads.

    Agni is That, Aditya is That,
    Vāyu is That, Chandramas is That,
    the bright One is That, Brahman is That,
    Waters are That, Prajāpati is That.

    All winkings of the eye arose
    out of the radiant Purusha.
    None has comprehended him
    above, across or in the midst.

    There is none to compare with Him.
    There is no parallel to him,
    whose glory, verily, is great.
    Hiraņyagarbha, 'May He not destroy us'.
    'No one other than thee' etc.

    He is the Deity who pervades all the regions,
    born at first, He is also within the womb.
    Verily, He who is born and is to be born,
    meets His offspring facing Him on all sides.

    Before Him there was nothing whatever born,
    who pervaded the entire world of created things;
    Lord of life, He rejoiced in His off-spring;
    Possessed of sixteen parts, He unites the three lights.

    He through whom the heaven is strong and the earth firm,
    who has steadied the light and the sky's vault,
    and measured out the sphere of clouds in the mid-air.
    Who is the Deity we shall worship with our offerings?

    Shukla Yajurveda Samhita XXXII:1-6
    Source



  3. #3
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Age
    52
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Does this not violate a central Hindu principle that God is immanent in His creation? This is held true by all Hindu denominations and sects. What you are saying is that God is completely transcendent. "God is watching us from a distance" is contrary to Hinduism.
    ========

    Is the Universe God?

    When you cannot perceive God in His original form and you can perceive God only through some medium of creation like space or energy or awareness, why not perceive God through the medium of matter also? Now if God exists in space, it means that God is exists in this universe. If God is present in the universe, the universe cannot be a separate object of entertainment to God. The Veda says that this universe is created for His entertainment (Ekaki Na ...). If you are present in the cinema and become the cinema by pervading all over the cinema, the cinema is not a separate object for you and therefore it cannot give entertainment to you. If you are the spectator of the cinema, you should be separate from the cinema. You are the subject and the cinema is object, which is separate from you. If the subject and object are one and the same, there is no existence of the object at all. It means God did not create this universe. If the creation is absent, there is no entertainment to God. This leads to the inability of God in creating any object that is separate from Himself for His entertainment. Such inability makes God impotent and then God cannot be Omnipotent. Therefore, the separate existence of the universe in which God is not present, must be accepted to avoid all these contradictions.


    Now the Veda says that God entered this universe (Tadevanu Pravisat…). But the Veda does not say that God entered the entire universe. God entered the Universe only through some limited form. Therefore, the entrance of God in to the universe is accepted. At the same time since God did not enter the entire universe, the universe exists as a separate object for His entertainment.





    You may argue that God entered the entire universe as per a Vedic statement (Eesha vasyam idam…). But if you carefully analyze that statement, it also means that God enters this big universe only through a small form. The translation of that Vedic statement reveals the correct meaning like this: “In this large world, any small world can be pervaded over by the Lord entirely”.



    This is the true translation. The small world means the human body and the big world means this entire universe. This means that the Lord enters this big world through a small world, which is the human form. The human form alone can be called as a mini-world. The large world contains nine items, which are the inert five elements (earth, water, energy, air and space) and the four living items called as Antah karanams (mind, intelligence, self-awareness or egoism and the awareness which stores all the information). All these nine items are common between this large world and the small human being. Therefore, the conclusion of the Veda is that God enters this large world through a small human form. This can be explained by common experience also.


    A spectator, who is seeing the cinema, wishes to take up a role in the cinema. Thus, he enters the cinema through a role and the cinema still entertains him. Therefore, the Gita also says that God enters this world only through a human form. The the Gita also says that God becomes a Jeeva or human form by entering such a human form (Jeeva Bhutah…). You have entered the role or the dress of a king in the drama, which means that you have become the king in the drama. For all the practical purposes you are the king in the drama.



    But you retain your identity as the actor in the role and therefore you have not become the king in the true sense. The audience can treat you as the king but at the same time they are aware that you are not the real king. Similarly the devotees treat the human incarnation as God for all practical purposes. But whenever egoism and jealousy enter their minds, they can analyze and know that God is in the human form and therefore the human form is not really God. Neither has God become the human form nor has the human form become God. Such clarification will reduce their egoism and jealousy and their devotion can become again alive.





    Therefore, God cannot enter the (entire) space because if God enters this space, He becomes one with the Universe and His entertainment is lost. Therefore the power of God is material cause of this world. The power is modified into this world as the mud is modified into the pot. Therefore, the formless God, you think, is only the power of God and not the original God. Space is only the modification of the power of God, which is like the mud. God is like the pot-maker who is not modified into the pot. In this example let us assume that the pot-maker created the mud and then made the pot from the mud.



    While creating the mud, the Lord is the creator or designer as well as the material. But while creating the pot from the mud, God is only the pot-maker or designer. The pot-maker, while creating the mud, is not modified because only the power of the pot-maker is modified into mud. Therefore, the material cause for the mud is the power of the pot-maker and not the pot-maker directly. This is the concept of Dvaita (duality) of Madhva.



    In the concept of Ramanuja, which is called as ‘Visishta Advaita’ (qualified monism), the pot is considered as an associated body of the pot-maker. Instead of the pot, you can take the example of the cloth. The cotton thread is the material cause of the cloth. The weaver is the creator of the cloth. The weaver has created the thread and the power of the weaver is modified into thread as explained above. The weaver is wearing the cloth made by him and this point alone (association of the creator with the creation) is the extra concept in this theory. The weaver treats the cloth wrapped on his body as another external body of his. The the Gita also says that your external gross body is like a shirt. Therefore, Ramanuja assumes this world as the body of God.


    The Advaita scholars mocked at this concept due to their ignorance. They said that if God were associated with the world, the changes in the world would mean the changes in the body of God, which means that God is changed. This is absolute foolishness. When the body is compared to an associated shirt, the changes in the shirt cannot be equated to the changes in the person who is wearing it. If you take the body of a realized soul like Ramana Maharshi, He treated his body as his shirt. He separated himself from the body and limited himself to the soul. He observed the surgery of his body like a person, who is the spectator of his shirt being stitched by somebody.



    Thus if you take God as a realized soul, the changes in this universe cannot touch God, in spite of His association with the universe. To reject the mocking of the Advaita Scholars, Madhva avoided the example of the weaver in which the wrapped cloth is treated as another external body. He took the example of a pot so that the pot cannot cover the body of its creator like the cloth. Therefore, the pot cannot be treated as an external body of its creator like the cloth.






    Shankara compared the world to an imagination or a daydream of a person. The person is not modified into the imagination. Only his mind or his mental energy (awareness) is modified into the imaginary world. This awareness (Chit or Para shakti or Mula Maya) is just like the cotton thread of a weaver or the mud of the pot maker. God created this awareness in the beginning and here also the power of God created the awareness, which is modified into the world. Thus just like the mud or the thread, the awareness is the material cause of the world. The power of God is the material cause of the awareness.



    Now the most important point comes. What is the difference between God and His power? Both God and His power are inexplicable and exist in the same state. Therefore, if the power is modified, we can say that God is also modified. In that case instead of the power of God, God directly becomes the material cause of awareness. The real point is that since God and His power are both inexplicable, the process of modification of the power of God into awareness also becomes inexplicable. In such a case you cannot use even the word ‘modification’ when you say that the power of God created the awareness.



    Shankara called awareness itself as God and for Him God is the awareness-incarnation (Awareness in which God has entered). This awareness-incarnation alone is taken as the original God by all the Acharyaas and also the Brahma Sutras.



    If you go beyond awareness you cannot understand God and cannot preach to anybody about God. For such original God, no words can be used to describe. When you utter a word some thought comes to your mind, as the meaning of that word. The original God is beyond thought and therefore, any word fails to indicate Him. If such a God is preached, nobody will believe in the existence of such a God. People will say that such a God does not exist. That is why the Buddhists became atheists. Therefore, any preacher should say that the absolute God is the awareness-incarnation. It means that awareness is God.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Location
    duhkhalayam asasvatam
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    92

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Quote Originally Posted by vishal View Post
    God is not in the statue

    The statute in the human form is a model to indicate the human form of the Lord. The ignorant human beings who cannot accept the human form of the God due to egoism and jealousy can worship the statute as training for sometime to worship the human form of Lord in future (Pratimahyalpa Buddhinam- Smruti). But one should not sit in the training through out his life. If he sits in the training only, he is born as an inert object like stone (Bhutejya yanti- Gita)
    Jai Ganesh

    Please do not insult the intelligence of millions of Hindus.
    The god who is omnipotent and omnipresence is well capable to reciprocate anyhow he/ she chooses
    Your assertstion that someone worships murti of lord are in ignorant or do so with ego and jealousy is baseless and even more ignorant is your statement that,
    "If he sits in the training only, he is born as an inert object like stone (Bhutejya yanti- Gita)"
    No where in Gita it states that, bring in the verse then we can discuss that.
    For your information the soul do not transmigrate as an inert object like stone

    Jai Shree Krishna

  5. #5
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Age
    52
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganeshprasad View Post
    Jai Ganesh

    Please do not insult the intelligence of millions of Hindus.
    The god who is omnipotent and omnipresence is well capable to reciprocate anyhow he/ she chooses
    Your assertstion that someone worships murti of lord are in ignorant or do so with ego and jealousy is baseless and even more ignorant is your statement that,
    "If he sits in the training only, he is born as an inert object like stone (Bhutejya yanti- Gita)"
    No where in Gita it states that, bring in the verse then we can discuss that.
    For your information the soul do not transmigrate as an inert object like stone

    Jai Shree Krishna
    Ganeshprasad;

    Idol Worship

    The statue or photo is the inert object. The form carved in a stone or painted on a paper is also an imaginary form and not even a direct photo. The statues and photos are only models representing the concept, which is knowledge. The form of statues and photos is mainly human form, which represents the concept that the Lord always comes to this world in human form as said in Gita (Manusheem Tanu Masritam).

    Please remember that Gita did not tell that the Lord would come in any other form. The forms of fish, tortoise etc., were only temporarily to kill the demons and nobody worshipped such forms during their time. But Rama, Krishna etc were the human forms worshipped by several devotees like Hanuman and Gopikas. The Lord will come in every human generation; otherwise, He becomes partial to a particular generation. If necessary the Lord can come whenever there is necessity as said in Gita (Yedaa yedaahi).

    Once this concept is realized, there is no need of temple and statue for you. You should go from school to college and then to university. This does not mean that when you leave the school, the school should be destroyed. The school must exist for the future batches. Therefore for you, the statue and the photo are not necessary and this does not mean that the statues, photos and temples should be broken. They should be protected and must be respected as the models of divine knowledge for the future ignorant devotees. Some devotees cannot accept the human form, which is before their eyes as said in Veda (Pratyaksha dvishah).

    For such devotees the statues and photos are necessary for meditation since they are at the school level. The statues and photos are useful for the meditation of such limited minds as said in Sastra (Pratima svalpa buddhinam). Veda says that the Lord does not exist in the inert objects (Natasya pratima, Nedamtat), but says that the inert objects can stand as models representing the Lord (Adityam brahmeti).

    Therefore seeing and meditation upon the statues and photos are correct in the case of the ignorant devotees. But the other rituals like offering food, burning camphor, fume sticks, oil lamps and breaking coconuts, offering flowers etc. are not mentioned in Vedas and there are unnecessary and are causing the air pollution harming the humanity. All these unnecessary rituals should be avoided.

    Offering food should also be done to the human form of the Lord only but not to the inert statues. Ijya or Yajna is cooking and offering of the food. Gita says that such Ijya should not be done to the inert objects. In the name of the statues, people are stealing the food and money. The statue and photo is not taking the food or Gurudakshina. The people behind the statue are taking those things and most of them are either cheating or wasting the money with ignorance. Whatever the Gurudakshina is given should go only to the priest and not the managing devotees. The business of the merchants by selling such materials in the temples should be stopped, because such materials are not even heard in Veda. Of course, the priest should be a Satguru and preach the divine knowledge to the devotees and the devotees should give Gurudakshina to such Satguru only. Thus, the temple should become a center of learning selfless devotion and divine knowledge and the priest must do only ‘Janna Eagan’ in the temple and not the ‘dravya Eagan’ as said in the Gita (Sreyaan dravyamayat).

    Gita condemned such Ijya before inert objects because such Ijya is only cheating and business. Such a devotee will be born as inert object (Bhutejya yanti). This business is connected to removal of the fruits of sins and getting the fruits of good deeds, which are not done.

    All this is false, because the theory of ‘karma’ says that one has to suffer for all his bad deeds and can never get the result of any good deed without doing it (Avasyamanubhoktavyam…kalpakotisatairapi). The spiritual path should be preached in the temple, which must be ‘nishkama karma yoga’ i.e., sacrifice of work and sacrifice of fruit (money) of the work to the Lord without aspiring any fruit in return. Remember, that only the Ijya is condemned and not the temples or statues, which are the models of the divine knowledge.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    369

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Namaste to all

    Self declared God again?

    Keno says

    I-5. That which one does not think with the mind, that by which, they say, the mind is thought, know That alone to be Brahman, and not this (non-Brahman) which is being worshipped.


    So, he may be correct after all. Though he himself proposes worship of what is in his mind (merely his opinion) and not that by which the mind is thought.



    13.23 Upadrashtaanumantaa cha bhartaa bhoktaa maheshwarah;
    Paramaatmeti chaapyukto dehe’smin purushah parah.

    13.23. The Supreme Soul in this body is also called the spectator, the permitter, the supporter, the enjoyer, the great Lord and the Supreme Self.
    -----
    -----
    13.28 Samam sarveshu bhooteshu tishthantam parameshwaram;
    Vinashyatswavinashyantam yah pashyati sa pashyati.

    13.28. He sees, who sees the Supreme Lord, existing equally in all beings, the unperishing within the perishing.



    So, God is not there everywhere and in every self?


    This fellow sprinkles his well written english with a chosen few sanskrit words to impress, but he is not a hindu.

    Om Namah Shivayya
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Posts
    640
    Rep Power
    109

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Vishal, it might be nice if you can answer/defend your original posts with your own words rather than posting more written material from Dattaswami websites without giving us the source of your posts.

    Regards,
    A.



  8. #8
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Govinda Lokam
    Age
    45
    Posts
    738
    Rep Power
    356

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnideva View Post
    Vishal, it might be nice if you can answer/defend your original posts with your own words rather than posting more written material from Dattaswami websites without giving us the source of your posts.

    Regards,
    A.
    vishal,
    Please limit to 3-4 posts a day and attempt to answer the doubts and comments. Atleast you have some message to tell people right? If you feed too much too fast they will not be digested.
    Guard your Dharma, Burn the Myth, Promote the Truth, Crush the superstition.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    January 2007
    Age
    52
    Posts
    4
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Quote Originally Posted by Atanu Banerjee View Post
    Namaste to all




    So, God is not there everywhere and in every self?




    Om Namah Shivayya
    Atanu Banerjee;

    If you are God can you do what God does, Creation- Maintenace- Destruction. No! one ordinary soul can even stand for a long time under the scrotting sun also! But people are claiming the soul to be God.

    God is the creator of the soul. Soul is only pure awareness and is the finest and subtlest item of creation and only scholars could imagince the pureawareness and be in that state and get peace, but soul is not God and self realisation is not God realisation it only half way only.

    God comes in Human form known as Human Incarnation only Human incarnation in the correct place of Lord, not every soul.

    No, past great devotee has ever claimed them selves as God, they served the contemproary Human Incarnation and never claimed as God. Hanuman served Shri Ram, the then human incarnation. Gopikas served Lord Krishna etc, but they never claimed themselves as God.

    If self is GOd then by birth itself every body contains God and they are all God!

    The word Atma (Self) is common in both Jeevatma (Soul) and Paramatma (Lord). The word collector is common in both District collector and Bill collector. You are asking for the address of collector. The address of bill collector is different from district collector. The purpose to meet the collector must also be specified, which indicates whether you have to meet the district collector or bill collector. Therefore, the self-realisation, which means reaching either Jeevatma or Paramatma must be clarified. If you reach Jeevatma, there is one type of benefit and if you reach Paramatma, there is another type of benefit. Benefit means to attain something, which you do not possess. Loss means to lose what you have. Some people treat that not to have a loss is also a benefit. But, benefit means really to attain something, which you do not have. If you attain Jeevatma you will not have the loss. You have attained what you have. In such case, you have become the Jeevatma which is pure awareness (Suddha chaitanyam). You have withdrawn the ‘I’ from the physical body. Then you have withdrawn the ‘I’ from the three qualities. Finally, you have fixed your ‘I’ to the pure awareness. By doing so, you have attained the peace which is the inherent quality of the pure awareness. You have crossed all the problems. You have lost the peace in these problems. Now you have attained what you have already in yourself. By this, you have arrested the loss and you can consider this as profit. Ofcourse, this attainment is intermediate state. This is only half of the journey. The rest half is to attain and please the Lord. The peace will be useful in the next half of the journey.

    The word Atma has four meanings. 1) The Human body made of five elements 2) the three qualities 3) the pure awareness 4) the Lord (Paramatma or Parabrahma). All these four meanings can be applied in only one place i.e., the human incarnation of the Lord. There is no second alternative for this case, because in the case of Lord Krishna, the external human body, the three qualities, the pure awareness and the Parabrahman exist. In an ordinary human being the first three items exist and the fourth item is absent. Therefore, if you take an ordinary human being as meaning for the word Atma, the second alternative i.e., Paramatma (i.e., Parabrahman) exists and therefore the doubt comes whether the word Atma means humanbeing or Paramatma. In the case of human incarnation this doubt does not exist because all the four items are together. Therefore, the best and doubtless meaning of the word Atman is only the human incarnation of Lord. The word Atma means pervading (Atati iti). Since the human body pervades some space, it is Atma. Since the three qualities pervade all over the pure awareness as the waves pervade the water, the three qualities are also Atma. Since the pure awareness pervades all over the body, it is also Atma. Since the Lord pervades all over the world as substratum, He is also Atma. The human incarnation is perceived by the naked eyes and therefore satisfies, pratyaksha pramaana (Deduction by Perception) of even Charvaka. The theory of Charvaka was mentioned as one of the six theories by Vidyaranya in his book called ‘Shat darsana saara sangrahah’. All the pramaanaas are based on pratyaksha only. Even in the inference (Anumaana pramaana), the fire is inferred by see ing the smoke.

    Unless you have seen the relationship between smoke and fire, how can you infer the fire? Even in the upamaana pramaana (simily) an animal in the forest is said to be similar to cow. Unless you have seen the cow, how can you recognise that animal? The fourth pramaana is ‘Sabda’ (statement of a reliable person). In this pramaana you believe the existence of the Kasi City when a reliable person says about it. In this pramaana also unless he has seen the Kasi City how can he talk about it? Therefore, the atheist and scientist, who follow the theory of Charvaka must also be convinced with the human incarnation of Lord. Such human incarnation is the Satguru, who can give you the right knowledge, which is the true meaning of Veda. By such knowledge only, the devotion (Bhakti yoga) and the service (Karma yoga) result. Knowledge is like a seed. It will give tree (Bhakti) and then the fruit (Karma or Seva) of the Lord. Without seed we cannot get the fruit. But, if the seed is not producing the tree and then the fruit, there is no use of such seed. Therefore, the knowledge must lead into practice and without practice there is no use of knowledge. Shankara said that human birth is very rare. Even if the human birth is achieved, the desire for salvation is still rare in the human beings. Even if such spiritual desire exists, catching Satguru is very very rare (Maha purusha samsrayah). Satguru is none but Narayana, who came down in the form of Nara (human being). Thus catching and pleasing the Satguru is the end of Saadhana (spiritual effort).

    The goal is attained here itself (Jeevanmukti). Veda says that the goal comes down before your eyes and is not in any other world (Yatsakshaat aparokshaat Brahma). Gita also says the same (Manusheem tanumasritaam). Datta is any human incarnation of the Lord that comes down as Satguru to preach the true knowledge of scriptures. Datta means the Lord donated to this world in human form. Datta does not mean a particular form of deity like Indra, Agni etc. The human being consists of three components only i.e., the human body (Sthula sareera), the three qualities (Sukshma sareera) and the pure awareness (Karana sareera). An ignorant human being leaves the human incarnation by seeing the external human body which shows all the rules of nature like birth, death, hunger etc. Since, Krishna is eating butter due to hunger, the ignorant person thinks Krishna as an ordinary human being. Majority of the people are ignorant due to illusion of Sthula sareera (human body).These people fail in the very first test itself. Some wise people think that the Lord is wearing external human body. Even the cloth of the king, can be cut by a blade. So, they think that the Lord is not the human body, but the soul inside, which is a mass of all good qualities only (Sattvam) as in the case of Rama. They think that the Lord is Sattvam quality only, which is Vishnu. This is represented by the single face of Datta (Eka mukha Datta). These people have committed two mistakes. 1) They think that the Lord is a quality and do not know that He is beyond any quality (Gunaateeta). Infact, He is the possessor of all these qualities and not any quality as said in Gita (Nachaham theshu). 2) They think that He is only Sattvam quality (Vishnu) and not Rajas (Brahma) and Tamas (Shiva). The three faces of Datta indicate that He is not in any single face (quality), but He is the possessor of all the three faces.

    Therefore, to remove the ignorance of these people, He exhibits the other two faces (Rajas & Tamas). Krishna stole the butter (Tamas) and Narasimha was very angry (Rajas). Datta came out of the lake embracing and kissing a naked lady (intensive Tamas) and all the sages who were waiting on the bank of lake ran away because they were expecting him to be only Vishnu having the good (Sattvam) quality. This is significance of the three faces of Datta. Foolish people think that Datta is a form moving with three heads as a peculiar specimen. Thus, even wise people fail in the second test because they think that the Lord is the quality and that too Sattvam quality only. The three qualities are the three coloured shirts. When you think that He is only white shirt (Sattvam), He will appear in red (Rajas) and black (Tamas) shirts. This proves that He is not any shirt and also that He is not in any shirt. Datta is not Sukshma sareera (the three qualities) or Jeeva.

    In the third test, the advaita scholars cross the human body and the three qualities. They settle in the standstill pure awareness (Nirguna chaitanyam) which is again the Kaarana sareera only and not the Lord. They think that the Lord is pure awareness without the three qualities like standstill water without waves. The advaita scholars try to touch the Lord through their self-effort i.e., self-analysis. By this, they can touch the pure awareness, which is the Maya i.e., the mind of the Lord. Maya is also pure awareness and is the power of the Lord. This Maya is like the ocean. The tidal waves in this ocean, which are the apparent modifications of Maya (Vivarta of Shankara) are the three qualities (Gunaas or bhaavaas) and these three qualities are called Brahma (Rajas), Vishnu (Sattvam) & Shiva (Tamas). A part of this Maya is modified into the inert five elements by which planets, hills, rivers etc. form. It is real modification (Parinaama of Ramanuja) because the awareness is converted into inert matter. A part of this Maya entered some inert forms, which have become the various living beings. In every living being a little quantity of Maya is present which has small vibrations.

    These vibrations are the three qualities in the soul. Therefore a soul is a drop of Maya (pure awareness) with small vibrations. The ocean of Maya with its tidal waves is surrounded by this Cosmos made of five elements (Brahmanda). Similarly, the soul is also surrounded by a small body made of five elements (Pindanda). The advaita scholars cross the body and the vibrations and finally settle in the standstill drop of Maya. When this drop is quantitatively extended, it becomes infinite Standstill Ocean without waves. Thus, one can imagine a standstill ocean through his standstill drop. But, he cannot touch the substratum of the ocean even by imagination. He is a part and parcel of the dream, which consists of living and non-living beings. The mind of the dreamer (awareness) with the qualities or ideas created the dream. A part of the mind is modified into the inert city. Another part of mind entered several inert forms as drops making those forms as living beings. The waves of the mind have been reduced to vibrations of the drops in the living beings. A human being can touch, at the maximum, the mind only, which is the root cause of the dream and the mind is not the dreamer. The advaita philosopher unable to know this secret mistakes the mind (Maya) itself as the dreamer (Mayin or Lord). Since, he thinks that the ocean of awareness is the Lord, he assumes that he himself is the Lord forgetting the quantitative difference between the drop and ocean even in his false assumption.

    He removes the quantitative difference between the drop and ocean by saying that the space is not true. Then the tiny soul becomes the infinite Brahman. Very Good! Then why this tiny soul which has become Brahman is not ruling the entire world and become Eeswara? He committed two mistakes. 1) Assuming that awareness is the very nature of the Lord, the quantitative difference between the Lord and soul is forgotten. 2) The Lord is not the awareness because the Lord is beyond imagination. Apart from these two mistakes, he is forgetting the existence of the super power in the Lord and absence of the same super power in himself. Krishna lifted the mountain on his finger and he told the excellent Bhagavat Gita. The advaita philosopher is unable to do these two things and claims himself to be the Lord. He is seeing only the similarity in the pure awareness. But, he is neglecting the difference in the power. Such attitude comes only due to ambition to become the Lord and egoism of self and jealousy on Krishna. He says that this world is a dream.

    But, this world is a dream for the dreamer who is the Lord. He is only a part of parcel of the dream. Even Shankara swallowed the molten lead and asked his disciples to swallow the same. Shankara declared that He alone is Shiva (Shivah kevaloham) and not the disciples. If you are ignorant, you will fail in the first test. If you are a wise person, you will fail in the second test. If you are an advaita scholar, you will fail in the third test. If you have passed all the three tests and if you have recognised Satguru, you are having Atma Jnana. If you have reached the Satguru, you have attained Atman.

    If you have become servant and pleased Satguru i.e., Kaivalya in which you are always associated and protected by the Lord in this world as well as in the upper world i.e., Brahma Loka. The Lord is the ruler of your self also and is called as Atmeswara in Veda (Atmeswaram sasvatam).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    369

    Re: God is not in the statue

    Quote Originally Posted by vishal View Post
    Atanu Banerjee;

    If you are God can you do what God does, Creation- Maintenace- Destruction. No! one ordinary soul can even stand for a long time under the scrotting sun also! But people are claiming the soul to be God.

    ------
    Namaskar,


    Who claimed to be God? Rather I saw your poster material claiming yourself to be god. A slimy affair. Changing names and all. Why don't you come with a single name?


    What is scrotting by the way? Your prepared english and your replies create such contrast, Mr. Incarnation. Your prepared english one can see all over the world now -- like political pamphlets. And sometimes you introduce words like scrotting or something. I was about to read it wrongly. hehe.


    "I am God" can be claimed (or blamed on others) by a pseudo Dvaitin like you only (who actually seem like a christian out to create trouble). An advaitin, a Vishistadvaitin, or a dvaitin will never be able to do it.

    Advaitin will not be able to do it since for Him there is nothing except God; there being no I, except that of God. You understand?



    13.28 Samam sarveshu bhooteshu tishthantam parameshwaram;
    Vinashyatswavinashyantam yah pashyati sa pashyati.

    13.28. He sees, who sees the Supreme Lord, existing equally in all beings, the unperishing within the perishing.


    Param Atma is indivisible since it is spirit. The sense of division alone is ignorance.

    13.17 Avibhaktam cha bhooteshu vibhaktamiva cha sthitam;
    Bhootabhartru cha tajjneyam grasishnu prabhavishnu cha.

    13.17. And undivided, yet He exists as if divided in beings; He is to be known as the supporter of beings; He devours and He generates also.


    If Param Atma can never be divisive then wherefrom the other atmas emerge? There are no other atmas. There is Purusha immersed in prakriti.

    And regarding atmesvaram you are talking about, can you show the exact verse? Yes, there is Lord of Hiranyagarbha (also called Taijjassa), who is known as world soul.

    Please show us the shruti verse which says that Turiya has an overlord..


    It is hallmark of such people as you to mislead. Like the example cited of Ramana to support Dvaita. The fact is that Ramana taught that dvaita considers the body as the self.

    What irony?

    Om Namah Shivayya


    Note: Such similarity to Shri Nirotu's views. Surprising.
    Last edited by atanu; 20 January 2007 at 01:30 AM.
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •